HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 04/13/2010 - HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROGRAM ASSESSMENT IMPROVEME J
DATE: April 13, 2010
STAFF: Steve Dush WORK SESSION ITEM
Joe Frank FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL
Pre-taped staff presentation: available
at fcgov.com/c/erk/agendas.php
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Historic Preservation Program Assessment Improvement Project
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Last spring,City staff initiated a study to review the policies,regulations and processes of the City's
historic preservation program in order to make recommendations for improvement to the program
and statutory language as they relate to development review.
A variety of viewpoints were sought for this study, including current customers of the historic
preservation program, boards and commissions, City Council, and City staff. The study was
conducted in two phases: the first phase focused on assessing the current historic preservation
program and the second phase focused on updates to the Code regarding historic preservation.
Following City Council input at its work session,the final study will be presented to the public and
for Landmark Preservation Commission review on May 12, 2010. City staff will then proceed to
implement the study's recommendations as resources permit.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
1. Does Council have any questions or concerns about the information and recommendations
for the process or the policy modifications presented in the Historic Preservation Program
Assessment?
2. Is Council comfortable with the "implementation phasing table" timeline, given current
resources?
BACKGROUND
Winter&Company,based in Boulder, Colorado,was selected to assist City staff in the preparation
of the study. Winter&Company is one of the country's leading consulting firms in the preparation
of preservation plans,renovation feasibility studies,as well as creation,review and implementation
of historic preservation regulations. A "Core Project Staff' team led the process that included
members from various City departments including, but not limited to: Advance Planning, Current
Planning, and the City Attorney's Office.
April 13, 2010 Page 2
The study process was organized in two phases. The first phase focused on improvements to the
review process and related components of the Fort Collins' preservation system. The process
for the first phase included:
• Seeking customer input on the City's historic preservation processes and policies by
conducting meetings and focus groups with representatives from builders, architects,
engineers, homeowners, City boards and commissions, and owners/developers of projects
that hold previous experience with the historic preservation process.
• Seeking policy maker input by conducting meetings with the City Council, City Manager,
Deputy City Manager,Planning and Zoning Board and Landmark Preservation Commission
members.
• Seeking staff input by conducting meetings with the Director of Planning, Development&
Transportation, Chief Financial Officer, City Attorney, Deputy City Attorney, Current
Planning Staff, Advance Planning Staff, and other City staff.
• Researching current planning documents, files and literature related to the City's historic
preservation processes and policies.
• Observing a Landmark Preservation Commission meeting.
The product of the first phase is an assessment of the operations of the City of Fort Collins' historic
preservation program. It recommends actions that will improve predictability in the program and
enhance its effectiveness. Moreover, the report outlines the ways in which the City identifies and
officially designates historic resources. It also considers how the review of proposed work occurs
on properties that are recognized as having historic significance. Finally, it describes current trends
in historic preservation that the City is beginning to experience. Some key recommendations for
improving the policy and review process base for the City's historic preservation system include:
Policy Recommendations
• Preservation concerns need to be fully addressed in all new and existing subarea plans, and
in the update of City Plan. It should be a required component, and it should be addressed
early in the Plan development. An initial step would be to revisit some of the City's key
subarea plans and add more discussion about historic resources. (See pages 15 and 19 of the
Historic Preservation Program Assessment).
• As the City's policies and regulations for sustainability are more fully developed in the
future, the role that historic preservation plays in sustainability should be a key topic of
discussion. For example, the City's energy policies and programs should consider that
keeping older buildings in use conserves the energy already expended to create them; the
City's waste reduction policies and programs need to consider that maintaining older
buildings reduces impacts on landfills; and the City's green building strategies need to
consider new energy-saving technologies for historic buildings. (See pages 15-16 and 19 of
the Historic Preservation Program Assessment).
April 13, 2010 Page 3
• Develop policies for the treatment of recent past resources,e.g.,buildings constructed in the
post World War II era. These buildings may require somewhat different treatment in
permitting and review. For example,the City should develop specific design guidelines for
the treatment of these buildings. These properties require some special consideration
because some have materials that may be more difficult to treat than those in traditional
historic properties. As an example,some commercial buildings constructed during the 1950s
and 1960s used materials and technologies that are no longer available. This can make them
more difficult to rehabilitate using conventional guidelines than earlier "Victorian"
construction. Guidelines for treatment of recent past properties may offer more flexibility
in using replacement materials and even in altering some features. (See page 20 of the
Historic Preservation Program Assessment).
Process Recommendations
• Consider creating a neighborhood conservation district tool. Conservation districts can be
a more flexible option than historic district designation and could address mass, scale, and
design of new construction as well as of existing buildings. (See pages 16-17 and page 20
of the Historic Preservation Program Assessment).
• Consider a tiered system of designation and treatment of historic properties. For example,
"Most Important Structures" (i.e.,National Register) could get the highest levels of review
and incentives, and, buildings of"Least Importance" (i.e., contributing to a local landmark
district) could get the least review and little incentives. There may be multiple tiers of
importance and preservation strategies. (See page 14 and pages 20-21 of the Historic
Preservation Program Assessment).
• Expand, improve, target and refine surveys of historic buildings. Surveys are critically
important. This information needs to be published in an easily accessible form for use by
property owners and developers. (See pages 17 -18 and 33 -34 of the Historic Preservation
Program Assessment).
• Preservation review needs to be more closely coordinated with other development review
processes. For example, a preservation review needs to be included in the City's
development review charts. (See pages 7-8 of the Historic Preservation Program
Assessment).
• Provide a "predictive model" to enable owners to gain a preliminary indication of the
potential historic significance of any unsurveyed property. A suggestion is that this be web
based so property owners or developers can do their own preliminary assessment at home
or in their office. (See page 8 and page 35 of the Historic Preservation Program
Assessment).
• Prepare and publish design guidelines for the treatment of historic properties. Make these
standards and guidelines easily accessible. This can help remove some of the mystery
associated with the treatment of historic properties. (See pages 10-11 and pages 35-36 of the
Historic Preservation Program Assessment).
April 13, 2010 Page 4
• The City needs to expand its incentive programs, and engage in more outreach, education
and training programs. This includes an effective outreach program.that educates owners
about the ways in which preservation supports sustainability initiatives. All planning staff
should receive a basic orientation to the preservation system and the principles involved.
The ongoing training of members of the Landmark Preservation Commission should include
the City's review system. All preservation-related information should be published on the
web. (See pages 12- 13 of the Historic Preservation Program Assessment).
The second phase of the study effort focused on updates to the portions of the City codes
related to historic preservation. The process for the second phase included:
• Reviewing the City Code and Land Use Code language for consistency and appropriateness
in relation to feedback collected as part of process improvement review.
Comparing City Code language to historic preservation codes and standards adopted by other
governmental entities.
• Analyzing consistency and appropriateness of City staff application of standards,codes and
other criteria.
The second phase of the study effort outlines recommendations for updates to the City of Fort
Collins' City and Land Use Codes as they relate to historic preservation. The report includes an
overall strategy for addressing Code updates,as well as specific recommendations for additions and
changes throughout the Codes. The report provides a review of selected Code sections that includes
identification of several areas where there is a lack of clarity or potential conflict with City policies.
Also provided is a summary of key observations and issues that are not directly related to specific
Code sections. A few key recommendations for improving the Code include:
Code Recommendations
• Add language that limits those who may initiate designation of a historic district or
landmark; possible options include but are not limited to City Council, Landmark
Preservation Commission, City staff, an established organization that has standing as a
"preservation organization,a property owner(if a single property)and,a defined percentage
of owners of properties (if a district). According to the current Code, anyone can initiate
local landmark designation.(See page 24 of the Historic Preservation Program Assessment).
• Modify the language in regard to "holds" on building permits as it applies to the initiation
of landmarking procedures, including different levels of"holds" for individual or district
landmarks;and,provide the Landmark Preservation Commission with authority to grant pre-
defined exceptions. (See page 25 of the Historic Preservation Program Assessment.)
• Consider adding language that would include other planning objectives as part of the
landmark designation discussion by City Council, such as subarea plans, neighborhood
character and city-wide redevelopment policies. (See pages 24-25 of the Historic
Preservation Program Assessment).
f
April 13, 2010 Page 5
• Expand administrative review procedures. This can increase the efficiency of preservation
review. (See page 33 of the Historic Preservation Program Assessment).
Landmark Preservation Commission Discussion
The Landmark Preservation Commission(LPC)received its initial outreach on this project on April
22, 2009, when Winter and Company kicked off the Historic Preservation Program Assessment
(HPPA)and outlined the process and objectives of the study. At its March 10 and March 24, 2010
meetings, the LPC discussed the HPPA with staff and had discussions that related the study to
efforts of Plan Fort Collins (PFC). Overall, the LPC is very supportive of the report and its
recommendations. The Commission did express proceeding cautiously with some of the
improvements recommended,for if they are not thoughtfully prepared they could create unintended
consequences. Therefore, a need to fully examine policy and procedural changes before adoption
is warranted. The HPPA recommendations that the LPC expressed proceeding cautiously on
included the following four items:
• The tiered rating system, (page 20), used both to determine a property's eligibility for
designation and for treating a property once designated. This is not the standard adopted by
the National Park Service, and is not common practice.
• The review of alterations and additions to properties within a conservation district(page
16, item 4.). The Commission strongly supports the concept of conservation districts;
however,the report proposes that alterations and additions to buildings within conservation
districts only be reviewed for scale, alignment and open space. Inappropriate alteration of
only a handful of buildings within a district could have a significant detrimental affect on
the other buildings, and could defeat the purpose of having a conservation district.
• The LPC would like to change the term "design guidelines" throughout the report to
"design standards and guidelines," to better reflect existing documents, and to provide
flexibility for future policy directives.
• Updating the Old Town Design Guidelines document should receive a much higher
priority than indicated in the report.
Winter&Company will meet with the Commission for a final presentation of the HPPA in May and
looks forward to actively engaging with the implementation of the recommendations.
NEXT STEPS
Following input from City Council during its April 13,2010 work session, staff and the consultants
will finalize the study report for presentation to the public and for Landmark Preservation
Commission review on May 12, 2010. City staff will then proceed to implement the study's
recommendations over time and as resources permit. Some of the recommendations include changes
to City Codes, which require review and recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Board
and/or the Landmark Preservation Commission and Council adoption. Included in the Historic
Preservation Program Assessment is an"implementation phasing table"that will assist in guiding
the process.
April 13, 2010 Page 6
ATTACHMENTS
1. Historic Preservation Program Assessment
2. Peer Community Review
3. City of Fort Collins Historic Preservation Report Implementation Recommendations Table
4. PowerPoint presentation
City of Fort Collins
Historic Preservation
Pro ram Assessment
g
ec
, 7 y
II
-�;, r1 . • _ ®tea � PL ,r...,.
Winter & Company
Combined Draft
January 19 , 2010
Fort Collins Historic Preservation Program Assessment January 19 , 2010
Draft Report
Historic Preservation Program Assessment Draft Report
The City of Fort Collins is engaged in an evaluation of its development review
process and policies as they relate to the treatment of historic resources . This
memo is a draft report on the process and policy base of the city 's preservation
system .
Note : This report reflects recent updates to the organization of the City 's
preservation department . The preservation department is moving from the
Advance Planning Department to the Community Development and
Neighborhood Services Department . Sections of the codes are currently being
updated based on the change of departments and this is reflected in the report .
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I . INTRODUCTION 2
A. The Benefits of a Preservation Program 2
B . Key Issues for the Preservation Program 2
C . Recent Questions 3
D . Scope of this Paper 4
E . Balancing Interests 4
II . MODEL PRESERVATION PROGRAMS 5
A. Characteristics of an Effective Preservation Program 5
B . Preservation System Components 6
C . Recent Trends Related to Preservation Programs 14
III . PROGRAM IMPROVEMENTS 19
A. Policy Directives 19
B . Ordinances 22
C . Operating Procedures 32
D . Resource Surveys 33
E . Design Guidelines 35
F . Compliance Process 36
G . Incentives and Benefits 36
H . Training , Education and Outreach 37
IV. IMPLEMENTATION PHASING TABLE 38
V. APPENDICES 40
A. Example Tables 40
B . Integrated Review 42
C . Guideline Flexibility and Ease of Use 43
Winter & Company Page 1
Fort Collins Historic Preservation Program Assessment January 19 , 2010
Draft Report
I . INTRODUCTION
This report provides an assessment of the operations of the City of Fort Collins '
historic preservation program . It then recommends actions that will improve
predictability in the program and enhance its effectiveness . The report focuses on
the ways in which the city identifies and officially designates historic resources . It
then considers how review of proposed work occurs on properties that are
recognized as having historic significance . It also anticipates current trends in
historic preservation that the city is beginning to experience .
A . The Benefits of a Preservation Program
Fort Collins has been a pioneer in the historic preservation movement . It
designated the Old Town Historic District , centered at the intersection of Linden
and Walnut Streets , and then adopted design guidelines for it in the late 1970s .
This provided for protection of its historic buildings and review of alterations and
new construction . This action preceded local designations of historic districts in
Aspen , Boulder, Denver and many other communities in Colorado that now have
noteworthy downtown historic districts .
The success of the Old Town Historic District is well known . The district is cited
by many people as a key cultural amenity as well as a dynamic economic
development driver . Today , the term " Old Town " extends to a broader part of the
downtown , reflecting the power of association with the historic district .
Old Town also receives recognition for its role in promoting business
development and recruitment citywide . Many businesses have chosen to locate
in Fort Collins in part due to the quality of life that Old Town represents , even
though they may actually locate their facilities in other parts of the city . This is
reflected in the city 's recent branding study , based on a survey in which many
respondents listed Old Town as one of the city 's key assets .
Citizens also recognize the benefits of preserving other individual , key landmarks
that exist throughout the community . Mature , close- in neighborhoods receive
acknowledgement as attractive , livable places , although most of these are not
officially designated as historic districts under city ordinance .
B . Key Issues for the Preservation Program
Even though historic preservation is valued in Fort Collins , there are questions
about how extensive the program should be , how it should fit within other
community planning initiatives , and whether there are ways to improve it .
Some owners of locally landmarked properties have expressed concerns that
they are not clear about the requirements that will apply ; others are worried that
the requirements will be strict and that there will be no flexibility in treatment of
their properties .
Winter & Company Page 2
Fort Collins Historic Preservation Program Assessment January 19 , 2010
Draft Report
Other preservation - related concerns arise in the course of project development
review and permitting when a property that is 50 years old is involved . This
occurs in two ways : First , if a project is subject to the development review
process set forth in the Land Use Code and the property includes a structure that
is 50 years or older, then it will be evaluated for its potential historic significance .
Secondly , if demolition or relocation is proposed for a building more than 50
years old , then a similar evaluation occurs .
C . Recent Questions
Within the context of these general concerns , some more specific questions
arise :
• Does the preservation program operate efficiently?
• Does it reflect best practices that are recognized nationally?
• Are there ways to improve its function ?
• Is it too restrictive in some areas ? And , conversely , is it too permissive in
others ?
• Should the program offer flexibility in treatment to property owners ? And if
so , how would it offer such flexibility?
• Can determinations of historic significance and appropriateness of proposed
work be made more predictable ?
• How can the program be more effective in achieving its objectives ?
• Is the city doing enough , in terms of historic preservation ?
• How can preservation interests be balanced with other community
development objectives ?
• How will the city address new , emerging trends and issues in preservation ,
sustainability and neighborhood conservation ?
Winter & Company Page 3
Fort Collins Historic Preservation Program Assessment January 19 , 2010
Draft Report
D . Scope of this Report
This report considers those questions in an assessment of the city 's review
processes and policies involving historic resources , and then provides
recommendations for improvement . An attachment titled , Peer Community
Review , addresses preservation programs in peer communities across the
country that helped identify and evaluate strategies for future consideration in
Fort Collins .
This assessment draws upon information collected in the following ways :
• Interviews with city staff
• Review of the city 's published materials related to permitting , its ordinances ,
review procedures and web site
• Review of peer community preservation programs
• Review of data related to projects reviewed by the city and in its annual
Certified Local Government reports
• Interviews with approximately twenty individuals , who are representative of
property owners , developers and preservation advocates , in a series of
"focus groups "
E . Balancing Interests
In considering these recommendations for process improvements , balancing
several interests are key considerations :
• Preservation of heritage
• Sense of community
• Sustainability
• Livability
• Political interests
• Economic development
• Ease of administration
• Cost effectiveness and life cycle costs
• Property owners
Winter & Company Page 4
Fort Collins Historic Preservation Program Assessment January 19 , 2010
Draft Report
II . MODEL PRESERVATION PROGRAMS
Nationally , effective preservation programs exhibit several qualities that define
their operations and some essential components . These are described in this
section .
A . Characteristics of an Effective Preservation Program
What is the profile of an effective local preservation program ? Today , a city 's
preservation program should have these three qualities :
1 . A Preservation Program should be Green .
Preservation inherently reinforces sustainability objectives , because re-using
buildings conserves resources . Historic buildings also can accommodate
compatible new energy saving technologies . An effective program is one that
educates owners and policy makers about the ways in which preservation
supports the city 's sustainability initiatives , and works proactively to promote
energy conserving measures associated with existing buildings . Unfortunately ,
there is a significant knowledge gap in the community about the "greenness " of
historic buildings . Many assume that older buildings are inefficient , when that is
not necessarily the case .
For example , some people are unaware of recent research , which demonstrates
that rehabilitating an original window is usually more energy conserving than
replacing it . Preservation programs that are remaining current in their outreach
are providing information that helps property owners better understand the
implications of rehabilitation and replacement ; some are even providing technical
support for energy retrofits . (The city 's web site does provide basic information
about energy conserving measures for existing homes , and it is meritorious in
that it recommends other options to window replacement . )
2 . A Preservation Program should be Clean .
The preservation program should be seen as operating objectively , applying the
same standards consistently and with a degree of predictability in the process . It
should be seen as being fair, in that all properties of similar type are treated the
same . Owners should have confidence in the process such that they can predict
the likely outcome following published criteria and guidelines .
While the city 's program does apply standards and guidelines consistently , and in
consistent procedural decision -making steps , these criteria and processes are
not made clear, in terms of easily accessible information on the web or in print
form .
Winter & Company Page 5
Fort Collins Historic Preservation Program Assessment January 19 , 2010
Draft Report
I A Preservation Program should be Lean .
The program should operate efficiently , with decisions made in a timely manner .
Time should be used wisely , and work efforts of others should be coordinated to
accomplish mutual objectives . Focus should be on delivering the " products " of
expedient decisions and technical assistance , as well as in developing tools that
enable users to make informed decisions about their properties .
Some inefficiency does exist in the current program , especially in the review of
50-year properties , where the steps in the process may not be clearly defined ,
and general development review may be well -advanced when preservation
issues are raised .
B . Preservation System Components
A Green , Clean and Lean preservation program is most effective when it includes
a range of components that work together in a coordinated manner . The basic
tools of an effective preservation program include :
1 . Policy Directives
Preservation programs operate within the framework of broader community
policies . These begin with policies in the City Plan :
" Historic buildings and districts will be preserved and protected . "
This is of course a broad statement, but it sets a clear direction . Other statements
supporting preservation are woven throughout the City Plan , especially in topics
related to community appearance and design . Under principle CAD-5 there are
directives for survey and identification of resources , education and awareness ,
incentives , planning and regulations for preservation and landmark designation .
"PRINCIPLE CAD-5. The quality of life in Fort Collins will be enhanced by
the preservation of historic resources and inclusion of heritage in the daily
life and development of the City and community. "
"Policy CAD-5. 4 Planning and Regulations. The City will formally
recognize the contribution of historic resources to the quality of life in Fort
Collins through planning and regulations. "
There is also a separate Historic Resources Preservation Plan, which was
adopted as part of the city 's comprehensive plan in 1994 , that sets forth more
specific policies for preservation and actions for their implementation .
411. A . 4 . 4 — Prepare short, informative brochures or "factsheets " on critical
preservation issues targeted to selected interest groups, such as realtors
and homeowners. Some possible topics include a description of the
Winter & Company Page 6
Fort Collins Historic Preservation Program Assessment January 19 , 2010
Draft Report
benefits of preservation, including the economy and tourism, a description
of regulations that apply to landmark structures and districts, histories of
neighborhoods, etc. "
2 . Ordinances
Ordinances establish the basic operations of a preservation program . The
preservation ordinance defines the mechanisms for identifying and protecting
historic resources . In addition , the basic zoning ordinance established certain
land use expectations that influence the climate for preservation . The building
code also influences preservation .
In Fort Collins , key ordinances include :
• Land Use Code Section 3 .4 . 7 Historic and Cultural Resources
Section 3 . 4 . 7 provides standards for preservation and treatment of historic
properties and their incorporation into new developments .
• Municipal Code : Chapter 14 Landmark Preservation
Chapter 14 is the preservation ordinance and includes the bulk of regulation
on historic properties , including provisions for demolition that apply to non-
listed structures .
• Adopted building codes include special sections for existing buildings and
historic structures . ( Residential Building Code : 2003 International Residential
Code with local Amendments and Commercial and multi-family Building
Code : 2006 International Building Code with local amendments . )
3 . Operating Procedures
The details of the steps that are followed to identify , designate , and then protect
historic resources are specified in operating procedures . Some of these are
embedded in the land use code . Others are referenced in that document , but
exist as separate stand-alone papers such that they can be updated more
frequently .
Development Application Form
The steps in a permitting process are a key part of operating procedures , and in
the case of historic preservation , should be coordinated with other permitting and
decision - making steps of the city . In that regard , existing permit application forms
that the city uses do not request information that could help facilitate review of
older buildings . The development review form , for example , does not ask if a
structure that is fifty years old or more is associated with the proposed project .
This means that a property owner may not yet receive an alert that their
proposed project is subject to preservation review .
Winter & Company Page 7
Fort Collins Historic Preservation Program Assessment January 19 , 2010
Draft Report
Development Review Process Chart
The Land Use Code requires consideration of the potential historic significance of
a property that is at least 50 years old . However , the city 's master development
review flow chart fails to reference this potential step , and does not indicate how
the process may be affected if a 50-year old property is involved . It also fails to
reference a potential review of any officially listed historic resource . Internally , the
points at which preservation staff are to review a property also are not clearly
charted . While staff of other city departments understand that they should include
a review by preservation staff, the timing when that should occur is not
documented in a formal development process checklist . As a result , it is possible
to overlook this step until quite far into the permitting process ; if, at a late stage , a
concern is raised by preservation staff or the Landmark Preservation
Commission , it can be perceived as an unexpected delay by a property owner .
Once it is determined that a review to consider the significance of a property and
its potential treatment should occur, the process is not clear. The operating
procedures are not stated in a way that is easy to interpret . Owners may have
difficulty in understanding how , and when , a decision related to a project that
involves a potential or designed historic resource will be made . A simple , user-
friendly guide is needed . This should be a web- based publication . It should
include simple check lists and flow charts that describe how the process will
operate , and which criteria will be used . In essence , a property owner should be
able to reasonably predict the steps involved and the approximate amount of time
that will elapse , based on simple information provided by the city .
Improving Predictability
People need information about the potential historic significance of their
properties in advance to help them make informed decisions about improvements
that they may contemplate . This includes those who are considering purchase of
a property and those who already own it. They wish to know these things :
• Is my property historically significant?
• If so , what are the requirements or limitations and what are the benefits ?
• What is the process for reviewing work proposed ?
Predictability can be improved in these areas :
• Providing more information to property owners in advance
• Determining in advance if a property has historic significance
• Identifying the role of historic resources in city plans and policies
• Understanding the guidelines for treatment of historic properties and the
flexibility that may be available in design review
• Clarifying the steps in the review processes for different property types
Winter & Company Page 8
Fort Collins Historic Preservation Program Assessment January 19 , 2010
Draft Report
Providing Flexibility
Preservation programs are structured to strive to be objective and treat all similar
resources equally . That is to say , after two properties are found to be historically
significant , they are to be treated equally , if all other conditions are the same .
" Flexibility" is a bit different in that context ; it is different from a policy- making
situation , such as developing a sub-area plan . However , there are ways to build
in some flexibility that everyone can understand and predict . Structured ways to
provide for flexibility include :
• Defining key features of property types
Preservation programs focus on preserving the key features of a property . By
defining the limits of these other portions of the property as being less
important , they are therefore open to more flexibility in alterations .
• Different survey levels
In the survey process , differing levels of significance may be identified . The
city already distinguishes "contributing " resources from those that are
" individually eligible . " This may be expanded on in combination with other
strategies .
• Designation levels
Establish different categories of designation , such as Individual Landmarks ,
Contributing Resources and Structures of Merit . This can be integrated with
survey levels as well as guidelines and other standards for treatment .
• Different guidelines
Related to designation levels , guidelines with increasing levels of flexibility
may be crafted for properties at lower levels of significance . This could also
provide more flexibility for incorporating a historic structure into a new
development.
Surveys identify resources that have historic significance . They are conducted
using adopted criteria for determining significance and can cover both districts
and individual resources . Surveys should include a listing of all of the properties
surveyed , indicating the significance of each of the historic resources and , where
applicable , should also include a description of the general character of the
district .
Tiered Surveys
Some communities use a tiered survey that indicates varying levels of integrity
for historic structures . Such a survey may also identify new buildings that are
compatible with their context . A tiered survey can then be linked to differing types
of review and permitting , as well as incentives and benefits . For example ,
properties of a high level of significance may be subject to review by the
preservation commission , whereas those of a lesser level may be handled by
staff. ( See also a later discussion about tiered designation systems . )
Winter & Company Page 9
Fort Collins Historic Preservation Program Assessment January 19 , 2010
Draft Report
The Need for More Surveys
Ideally , the entire city would already be surveyed , but it is not . Fort Collins has
undertaken some survey updates in recent years , but like many communities , it is
substantially behind . From time to time , the city is able to fund surveys of small
areas , usually with grants . Priority should be given to this program , with
emphasis placed upon areas that are targeted for redevelopment , or where
substantial demolition is occurring or is anticipated .
Because many areas are not surveyed , determinations of significance must be
made on a case-by-case basis as projects come in for permitting . This is one
purpose of the 50-year "filter , " to provide an opportunity to conduct an initial
determination of significance . However , if this occurs well into a development
submittal , it can lead to surprises for the property owner.
Access to Survey Information
A key role of the historic survey is to provide information that the city and
property owners can use at the outset of considering an improvement project , in
order to determine if a property has historic significance . In an efficient program ,
a property owner should be able to pull up information on the web that identifies
any historic significance .
Survey information should be readily available to users . Even for those properties
that have been surveyed , the information is not digitized and posted on the
internet . It also is not linked to the city 's GIS system . This means that , when a
query is made about a property , its potential historic significance is not made
known .
Owner-determinations of Significance
An official determination of historic significance requires objective application of
criteria that are understood by professionals in the field . However , in the absence
of comprehensive , city-wide surveys , it may be possible to craft a " predictive
model " for owners to use that would give them a preliminary indication of the
potential historic significance of their property . This might take the form of a web-
based , interactive set of questions . The city should explore the potential to
develop this type of self-test , as a means of helping owners anticipate the
development review process . With this information provided by the owner , it
could also reduce staff time in basic research about the property , and thereby
reduce the review time required .
5 . Design Guidelines
Design guidelines provide objective criteria for determining the appropriateness
of proposed work affecting historic resources . Guidelines help inform a property
owner in advance of the criteria on which their designs will be judged , and are
later applied by city staff and boards in permitting .
Winter & Company Page 10
Fort Collins Historic Preservation Program Assessment January 19 , 2010
Draft Report
Effective guidelines provide clear examples of appropriate and inappropriate
design treatments using local properties . They also define the range of flexibility
that may be available for alterations and additions . They can help to identify
which features are significant that should be preserved , and conversely , which
features are less critical to the integrity of a historic resource , thereby indicating
where greater flexibility may be afforded . Such guidelines are especially
important for administrative reviews related to 50 year old properties .
At present , custom-tailored design guidelines exist only for Old Town , and these
are out of date . In lieu of local guidelines , the City of Fort Collins uses the
Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines for Treatment of Historic
Properties . These serve as the basis for most locally-written guidelines across
the country, and are based on principles that are widely accepted nationally .
However, they can be difficult for lay people to interpret . While they should
continue to be the basis for design guidance , additional guidance , which is
custom -tailored to Fort Collins , is needed .
With respect to the Old Town Historic District , while the guidelines have been
effective , they need to be updated to enhance clarity and predictability for
owners . The range of flexibility they may have in dealing with the properties is not
clearly understood , and in the absence of good guidelines , owners often fear the
worst .
Citywide Preservation Guidelines
Clear, well - illustrated design guidelines that apply citywide to historic resources
are needed . They should address treatment of officially designated properties ,
and also should indicate how they apply to properties in the other development
review tracks that are identified as having historic significance . These guidelines
would help orient property owners in the appropriate direction at the outset of
their improvement planning , and would help make the criteria for determining
appropriateness more transparent .
6 . Compliance Process
An effective program must have mechanisms to assure compliance with permits
and other program requirements . Enforcement for non-compliance is defined as
a part of this component .
Enforcement and compliance are on -going issues in Fort Collins , as in many
communities . For example , some work is executed without the required approval ,
even when it is required . In other cases , an approval has been issued , but the
work executed in the field deviates from that which was approved . This requires a
supportive working relationship between preservation planning staff and code
enforcement staff. It also requires clear documentation of what has been
approved .
Winter & Company Page 11
Fort Collins Historic Preservation Program Assessment January 19 , 2010
Draft Report
Compliance Tracking
A simple form , with designated sign-off points , should be attached to the building
permit , and should be used in conjunction with other normal site inspections on a
property that has received approval for preservation -related work.
7 . Incentives & Benefits
An effective program also offers some special benefits to stimulate investment in
historic properties , encourages property owners to follow appropriate
rehabilitation procedures , and even assists those with limited budgets . This may
include financial assistance , tax relief, technical assistance or regulatory relief
such as streamlined review processes and special flexibility in building codes .
The incentives most frequently referenced in Fort Collins are the federal and
state income tax credits that are available for certified properties . Some design
assistance has been offered in the past as well . In general , the incentives
available fall short of those that many communities offer . Boulder, for example ,
offers a rebate on the local sales tax of construction materials that are purchased
for an approved preservation project . Others offer small design assistance grants
to property owners to help them plan an appropriate design , while some waive or
reduce local permit fees . Offering flexibility in permitted uses , parking
requirements , building setbacks and other code-related regulations are other
incentives that may be offered .
Expanding the Incentive Package
Fort Collins should strive to expand its incentives and benefits for preservation of
historic structures . This should include options for incorporating a historic
property into a new development, which is an issue likely to arise in some of the
targeted redevelopment areas of the city .
8 . Education & Outreach
Helping property owners learn how to maintain their historic properties as active ,
viable assets is also a key part of a successful preservation program . Many
property owners willingly comply with appropriate rehabilitation procedures and
develop compatible designs for new construction when they are well informed
about preservation objectives . Workshops that provide helpful information about
rehabilitation techniques and publications that build an understanding of historic
significance are examples of education and outreach strategies . Well -written
design guidelines that provide useful information , as well as literal standards , can
also serve an educational role .
Education and outreach is often a function of a partner organization , a non - profit
group that promotes preservation and history . For a time , Historic Fort Collins
aspired to this role . It has not been active in recent years .
Winter & Company Page 12
Fort Collins Historic Preservation Program Assessment January 19 , 2010
Draft Report
Expanded Outreach and Education
In the absence of other supporting organizations , the city preservation program
needs to engage in more outreach and training . This will help the program
operate more smoothly . Providing information about effective energy
conservation methods that are appropriate for historic properties is an example .
9 . Program Activity Reporting
A key question is how Fort Collins compares in the volume of design review
activity that it conducts , both for properties formally listed in its historic districts
and as individual landmarks , as well as for properties that reach the 50-year
threshold . Substantial amounts of data related to historic properties are provided
in the preservation office 's annual reports to the city and to the Colorado
Historical Society as part of its Certified Local Government requirements .
However, the data is not clearly summarized in a way that facilitates comparison
with other communities , and it is difficult to place the volume of 50-year reviews
in the broader context of the total number of projects that are reviewed by the city
each year for building permits or for development approvals under the land use
code . It is reported anecdotally that only a small percentage of the projects that
pass through development review actually involve historic resources . A standard
format for reporting to the Colorado Historical Society is required for Certified
Local Governments , which Fort Collins uses , but this format does not request
some of the information that would be useful in annual evaluations by city
administrations .
Annual Reporting
The city should adopt a simple reporting form that helps to compare the
magnitude of properties considered for historic significance with the total number
of permits issued annually . This would be a supplement to the reporting
requirements of the CLG program . This would put the " preservation filter" aspect
of design review into perspective .
10 . Level of Historic Significance
The city 's 1994 preservation plan recommends adopting a system in which
differing levels of historic significance are used . These different levels of
significance were to be linked to different levels of review , and even the degree of
rigor in which design guidelines were to be applied . The general approach is that ,
for properties of lesser significance , more flexibility in treatment may be afforded .
Several communities have experience working with this type of system . Some of
these are reported in a separate survey of peer communities ; please see the
Peer Community Review paper for more information .
Winter & Company Page 13
Fort Collins Historic Preservation Program Assessment January 19 , 2010
Draft Report
Note that some preservation advocates argue tiered ratings are not necessary , in
that this degree of flexibility is built into the Secretary of the Interior's standards
for identifying historic resources and also in their guidelines for treatment of
historic properties , and that therefore formally designating different tiers is not
necessary . In some cases , tiers have been criticized , because it is felt that they
create a " lower" class of properties that are more vulnerable to loss or
inappropriate alteration . Nonetheless , because the city has already established a
review of older properties in its development review process , it has implied that
different levels of significance exist . But , it has not provided the tools in the
surveys , review processes or guidelines that would make this approach work
efficiently .
Developing a Tiered System
The city should consider adopting a tiered system of ratings . This would identify
different levels of significance , based on clear criteria , and then would indicate
the basic approach anticipated for their treatment . This will require careful
thought , but would enhance predictability for all parties involved . It should remain
clear that the city 's objective continues to be preservation of cultural resources ,
but that there are , in some cases , options to consider .
C . Recent Trends Related to Preservation Programs
With these typical system components in mind , preservation programs continue
to evolve across the country . This in part reflects broader trends in society that
are affecting community planning in general as well as preservation planning .
Some of these trends are introducing new issues to historic preservation that
may not be fully apparent in the current program , but which are likely to become
more obvious in time . The following trends should be taken into account when
crafting system improvements for Fort Collins .
1 . Program Operations
Communities continue to seek ways to streamline programs and accomplish core
objectives in the most efficient ways . This includes devising methods to simplify
design review and to limit some forms of permitting . Delegating more decision
making to staff, and defining some minimum standards that can be approved "at
the counter" are operational methods some communities are using . This ,
however, requires a survey system that supports administrative review , and also
requires clear guidelines and standards to expedite review . The city 's existing
design guidelines would not be sufficient for this type of streamlined review .
2 . Integrated Systems
Cities are seeking ways to assure that preservation is more deliberately
integrated into planning in general . In this way , historic resources are more
directly considered in other planning activities , and there is a heightened
awareness of the preservation program .
Winter & Company Page 14
Fort Collins Historic Preservation Program Assessment January 19 , 2010
Draft Report
Including preservation staff in development review at the outset of a project
application is an example . Also engaging preservation issues in sub-area plans is
an effective means of more closely integrating preservation . In the absence of
this integrated planning , preservation issues often arise on a case- by-case basis ,
and staff must make decisions without clear policy directives that would
otherwise be presented in a sub-area plan .
One example of a successful integration of preservation is the West Side
Neighborhood Plan . It gives a description of the types and extent of historic
buildings found in the area , and sets goals for future development to preserve
both these resources and the existing character of these areas .
Although there are examples of adequately addressing preservation in a sub-
area plan , it appears that some critical sub-area plans in Fort Collins are
inadequate in the policy guidance that they provide related to historic
preservation . This means that decisions involving historic properties will be made
using the provisions in the land use code that provide for considerations of
significance for any properties more than 50 years old , regardless of their
location in the city .
If a property is potentially individually eligible for local listing , then preservation
staff are obligated to pursue preservation of the resource . The ordinance does
not give them the ability to consider other factors , such as the fit with other
community objectives , and it does not permit them to treat properties differently ,
based on varying degrees of significance and integrity . This oversight contributes
to the perception that historic preservation appears as a last- minute obstacle in
the development review process .
Clarifying Preservation Objectives in Sub-area Plans
The city should more formally address preservation in its sub-area plans . It
should be a required component , and should be addressed early in the plan
development. An initial step would be to re-visit some of the city 's key sub-area
plans and add more discussion about historic resources .
3 . Sustainability
A major shift in public policy towards sustainability is influencing all land use
planning across the country. Preservation plays an integral role in any
sustainability policy and this may be used as an opportunity to further integrate
preservation with other aspects of land use planning and development policies .
Winter & Company Page 15
Fort Collins Historic Preservation Program Assessment January 19 , 2010
Draft Report
In Fort Collins , sustainability also is emerging as a high priority concern . This
relates to preservation in these ways :
• Keeping older buildings in use conserves the energy already expended to
create them .
• Maintaining older buildings reduces impacts on landfills .
• Historic buildings often have inherent energy saving features , which
sometimes have been "forgotten . "
• Historic buildings can be adapted with new energy-saving technologies , often
more easily than expected .
The role that preservation will play in the city 's sustainability program should be a
topic of discussion in any future planning activity . This will only grow in
importance in the coming years , and if it is not addressed , more perceived
conflicts are likely to arise . The resources of Colorado State University in this
field are also important assets to consider . It may be possible to collaborate on
educational programs as well as on demonstration projects that test the energy-
conserving opportunities of historic resources .
Including Preservation in Sustainability Initiatives
The city should include preservation considerations as it develops new
sustainability policies and regulations .
4 . Alternative Protection Tools
Many communities are using alternative tools to preserve the historic character of
their neighborhoods . Sometimes , neighborhoods seek historic district status to
address more basic issues related to new construction . They seek the historic
district designation because it is the only tool available that in any way addresses
the issue . In response , some communities have added other options to the
character- management toolkit . They do so recognizing that the tool should fit the
objective , and that the historic district tool should be used strategically for its
originally intended purpose . These new options include the use of conservation
districts and form- based codes .
Conservation districts focus on maintaining the traditional building scale and
character of a neighborhood . They use special zoning standards , and sometimes
design review guidelines , that focus on new construction and additions . The
emphasis is on retaining the appearance of the character of a neighborhood in
terms of building alignment , scale and open space as seen from the street .
Alterations to existing buildings are not reviewed . This may be addressed by a
design review process that is similar to that for historic districts , but with more
limited criteria and scope of approval . It also may be implemented as a
prescriptive set of standards that apply as an overlay for a specified area . These
can then be administered at the permitting counter .
Winter & Company Page 16
Fort Collins Historic Preservation Program Assessment January 19 , 2010
Draft Report
Form - based codes are similar , but are prescriptive , defining the mass and scale
of building that is permitted . They can apply as the underlying zoning for
designated zoning districts , or they can apply to specific building types that are
permitted . They may set the maximum size of a building , related to forms
traditionally seen in an area .
Expanded Character-management Tools
Additional tools should be considered to complement the preservation system in
Fort Collins . In some cases , these alternative tools would more directly address
the community 's objectives for a specific area . They can also be easier to
administer, thus improving overall program efficiency .
5 . Refined Survey Methods
Many communities are implementing survey systems that are management
oriented , based on their preservation objectives . This means using a tiered
survey that indicates varying levels of integrity for historic structures . Such a
survey may also identify new buildings that are compatible with their context .
In its Preservation Program Plan , Fort Collins outlined a concept of tiered levels
of significance that were then linked to different levels of protection , incentives
and design review . However , this was not implemented in the revised Land Use
Code . The system suggested in that plan may be more complex than is needed ,
but the concept is one that merits consideration .
It is also important that when a historic survey is conducted , the information
included be helpful to property owners in identifying those features that are key to
its significance . By noting those features , a survey can help provide guidance to
property owners and also help to indicate those areas of the property which are
less sensitive , and where greater flexibility for alterations is appropriate . As an
improvement to the system , refinements to the survey form should occur.
One concern that arises related to these custom -tailored surveys is how they can
also conform with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and the state 's
requirements . In some communities , they have accomplished this by creating a
supplement sheet that accompanies the standard state survey form . In this way ,
the information that is required for entry into the state 's system is provided as
stipulated , but additional information is available for local review and planning
processes .
Winter & Company Page 17
Fort Collins Historic Preservation Program Assessment January 19 , 2010
Draft Report
Improving the Survey Tool for Fort Collins
As it continues its survey program , the city should refine the historic property
survey instrument with the objective of recording information that will be useful in
an on-going property management mode . That is , the survey should include
information that identifies key features to help owners make informed decisions
about their properties . (The illustration in Appendix C indicates a process for
identifying key features of a structure . It suggests , in that example that most of
the key features are on the front of the building . This indicates that more flexibility
would be available to the side and rear, where fewer key features are found . )
Winter & Company Page 18
Fort Collins Historic Preservation Program Assessment January 19 , 2010
Draft Report
III . PROGRAM IMPROVEMENTS
This section provides recommendations for improving the preservation system in
Fort Collins . They are organized around the preservation system components
introduced earlier.
With limited resources to address the recommendations in this report , it is
important to establish priorities for action . A summary table of the following
recommended system improvements is provided at the end of this section which
provides a proposed phasing schedule . These phases were determined by
prioritizing actions that will have the greatest or most immediate impact , as well
as with consideration for the relative ease of their implementation .
A . Policy Directives
Policies are crafted by appointed boards and commissions and formalized by city
council . Staff's role is to administer policy . That said , there are important ways in
which staff can more effectively convey policy in their actions :
1 . Include preservation concerns when developing sub -area plans .
Preservation staff should be involved in development of sub-area and specific
plans . The balance between other goals can be established at this time . Policy
directives in sub-area plans can also signal to preservation staff that there are
other priorities which must be taken into consideration .
( Note that City Council always has the ability to insert other policy considerations
into any specific development review through a public hearing on the property .
However, the objective is to provide more policy guidance formally in advance
such that the burden of a council hearing is avoided . )
2 . Develop a preservation and sustainability initiative .
Sustainability is a broad concept that is continuing to evolve . Older buildings can
play an important role . In many respects , they are more energy efficient , or can
be retrofitted easily . But , in many cases , the information and techniques are not
available or readily understood . In response , the city should :
• Establish policy that recognizes the role of conserving existing buildings as
sustainable and that this should be considered when determining best
approaches ; in this respect , the preservation program should be seen as a
partner in sustainability .
• Establish a technical assistance program for property owners to accomplish
energy-saving retrofits . ( Include workshops , informational handouts , and
perhaps organize a tech -school retrofit program . This may be an opportunity
to partner with the university . )
• Related to technical assistance , establish a process for determining repair
and replacement strategies for windows , materials and roofing that take
sustainability into consideration .
Winter & Company Page 19
Fort Collins Historic Preservation Program Assessment January 19 , 2010
Draft Report
3 . Develop policies for the treatment of recent past resources .
Younger properties that may now be considered for historic significance may
require somewhat different treatment in permitting and review . In response , the
city should develop specific design guidelines for the treatment of recent past
buildings . These properties require some special consideration , because some
have materials that may be more difficult to treat than those in traditional historic
properties . As an example , some commercial buildings constructed during the
1950s and 1960s used materials and technologies that are no longer available .
This can make them more difficult to rehabilitate using conventional guidelines
than earlier "Victorian " construction . Guidelines for treatment of Recent Past
properties may offer more flexibility in using replacement materials and even in
altering some features .
4 . Consider a neighborhood conservation tool .
A growing issue is promoting conservation in older neighborhoods . Consider
options for neighborhood conservation that are less comprehensive than historic
district designation . They would address mass and scale , and additions , but not
alterations to existing buildings .
5 . Consider a tiered system .
Consider a tiered system of designation and treatment of historic properties . This
would link levels of significance and integrity to different levels of review , and the
degree of rigor with which design guidelines would be applied . Properties that are
National Register eligible would be expected to be preserved "to the greatest
extent feasible , " as the ordinance now provides . Some greater flexibility in
preservation expectations , the range of incentives available and the alternatives
for mitigation would be assigned to the other levels .
Review would include consideration for :
• The level of significance and level of preservation that is expected based on
the tiered system
• The context of the property
• The relationship to other planning objectives for the area
The following table outlines an example of potential levels of significance and
links them to treatment policies . Note that this is only a preliminary example for
illustrative purposes .
Winter & Company Page 20
Fort Collins Historic Preservation Program Assessment January 19 , 2010
Draft Report
Property Rating Treatment Objectives Notes
Type 1
Highest level of significance , Require preservation to High priority for
individually eligible for National maximum extent assistance and
Register listing . feasible* . incentives . Landmark
proceedings may be
contemplated if
necessary .
Type 2
High level of significance , Require preservation to High priority for
eligible as a contributor for maximum extent assistance and
National Register listing . feasible* . incentives . Landmark
proceedings may be
contemplated if
necessary .
Type 3
Moderate level of significance . Encourage preservation Provide incentives , but
when feasible . may consider mitigation
alternatives when other
compelling city
objectives exist .
Type 4
Non -contributor, but retrievable Encourage restoration . Provide some incentives .
as a historic resource , as
owner's option .
Type 5
Non -contributor, with no No preservation Demolition or alteration
potential significance . ( New expected . permitted after 50-year
building or one substantially consideration .
altered . )
*There is always a consideration of infeasibility (economic hardship ) in expecting
preservation of a resource .
Actions:
• Develop a preservation and sustainability initiative .
• Include preservation goals and preservation 's role in sustainability in the
update of the City Plan .
• Update existing sub-area plans to include preservation objectives .
• Review options for policies for the treatment of recent past resources .
• Evaluate options for the adoption of alternative neighborhood character
management tools .
• Review options for adopting a tiered system of historic designation and
review .
Winter & Company Page 21
Fort Collins Historic Preservation Program Assessment January 19 , 2010
Draft Report
B . Ordinances
Recommended ordinance improvements found throughout this section include
these basic components :
• Basic Clean-ups
Some improvements focus on clarifying existing provisions in the code that
are appropriate , but have technical flaws .
• Modifications to Reflect Policy
These improvements focus on clarifying how City policies relate to the
preservation ordinance .
• New Provisions
These recommendations address new elements that should be added in
response to national trends in the best practices for historic preservation .
• Format
These recommendations focus on the organization and formatting of the
codes .
These different types of strategies are identified throughout this section .
1 . Land Use Code
Land Use Code Section 3. 4. 7 Historic and Cultural Resources
Section 3 . 4 . 7 provides standards for preservation and treatment of historic
properties and their incorporation into new developments . It provides a good
basis for design guidelines as it sets the broad principles for the treatment of
historic resources , but gives only very limited guidance or direction for
rehabilitation . It provides more specific criteria for the design of new construction
in a Historic District or adjacent to a listed resource . However , these criteria are
written primarily for a commercial context , and may not be as applicable for infill
within or adjacent to a residential context . While this section does not currently
apply to single-family homes , as residential historic districts are established , it will
need to apply to areas adjacent to these residential contexts .
The policies in Land Use Code Section 3 . 4 . 7 ( E ) Relocation or Demolition overlap
with those for demolition and relocation in Municipal Code 14- 72 . The Municipal
Code states the specific criteria and regulations for demolition and relocation
review . The Land Use Code provides a general statement that summarizes these
policies but not the complete standards , nor does it reference the Municipal Code
as the applicable standards .
Winter & Company Page 22
Fort Collins Historic Preservation Program Assessment January 19 , 2010
Draft Report
Strategy: Add language defining the criteria for treatment of historic properties in
general , such that they will apply to all potential property types , including single-
family .
Add language to 3 . 4 . 7 ( E ) that references Municipal Code 14-72 to clarify
applicable procedures for demolition review .
2 . Municipal Code : Chapter 14 Landmark Preservation
Article I . In General
Sec. 14-5. Standards for determining the eligibility for designation of sites,
structures, objects and districts for preservation
This section of the code lists four criteria for eligibility to be designated as a
historic landmark . The resource must meet one or more of these criteria , in
addition to having a sufficient degree of integrity for the exterior of the property .
The level of integrity required is not specified ; however , in the definition of
"exterior integrity, " it is implied that the level required is relative to its level of
significance . That is , a property of a lower degree of significance may be
expected to have a higher degree of integrity . This need not be the case . The
level of integrity should be separated from the definition of significance .
Strategy: Add language that more clearly defines criteria for eligibility , and that
acknowledges different levels of significance . Also , clarify the definition of
" integrity , " including the discussion of the different "aspects " of integrity as used
by the Secretary of the Interior. ( See the City 's Preservation Plan , adopted in
1994 , for suggestions of criteria for integrity . )
Article II . Designation Procedures
This article defines the steps to follow in designating historic resources . While it
lays out general steps for designation , it does not give clear guidance on the full
procedure to be used by staff when designating a district . Clear policy is lacking
for steps such as neighborhood meetings and the initiation of the district
designation procedures . This neighborhood meeting is typically held before the
Landmark Preservation Commission ( LPC ) "designation hearing , " though it is not
mentioned in the Code .
Strategy: Update the designation procedures for districts . A clear process of
steps should be laid out , including language stipulating that a preliminary
neighborhood meeting will be a part of the district designation process .
Winter & Company Page 23
Fort Collins Historic Preservation Program Assessment January 19 , 2010
Draft Report
Sec. 14=21. Initiation of procedure
Owner consent is not required to designate a landmark . However, when an
owner does not concur with the nomination , a further level of public review is
required above and beyond that stipulated for designation when the owner
concurs . In addition , the code provides that any city resident may file a
nomination for a historic district . This leaves the possibility of "frivolous "
nominations , or of ones that may not be well thought out .
The initiation of designation procedures for a district is typically a decision of the
LPC to proceed after a review of the application . This application is required to
give basic information on the historic significance of the district, however, it does
not require sufficient justification of the boundaries of a district .
Strategy: Add language that limits those who may initiate designation of a
historic district or landmark to :
1 . The City Council , the Landmark Preservation Commission and the Director of
Community Development and Neighborhood Services would have standing
to initiate a nomination .
2 . An organization with an established interest in preservation . This would be
clearly defined and can include groups such as a non -profit with preservation
in their mission statement etc . Inclusion of such groups on a list of parties
with standing is a common practice , and can help build community support
and preservation partnership ties .
3 . The property owner ( if a single property) .
4 . A defined percentage of properties in a proposed district .
Also , clarify the preliminary level of information that is needed to indicate that a
potential district exists and that further consideration is merited . This should
include requirements for the justification of district boundaries and for the area to
be documented well enough that the LPC would be able to determine if a
nomination has merit and should proceed .
Sec. 14=23. Community Development and Neighborhood Services review
This section instructs staff in reviewing a proposed designation to consider the
Zoning Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan , and the effect on the neighborhood ,
as well as any other planning consideration that may be relevant . This leaves
room for staff to recommend the denial of a landmark designation application for
an eligible property , based on factors other than historic significance and
integrity . That is to say , if the Comprehensive Plan or a sub-area plan calls for
other redevelopment that does not consider including historic resources , this fact
can be a part of the decision -making for staff's recommendation . However, this
ability can also provide for a degree of flexibility in the preservation system to
allow for a combination of planning objectives to be considered . For example , the
Winter & Company Page 24
Fort Collins Historic Preservation Program Assessment January 19 , 2010
Draft Report
vision for a neighborhood from a specific plan that calls for maintaining traditional
character may be considered when determining preservation priorities for that
area .
Strategy: As it exists , the City could choose to avoid designation because of
potential conflicts with other policies . However , there may be times in which
recognizing the property as historic would enable benefits that would make
preservation feasible , even in the face of other planning policies , and the owner
may wish to retain the building . Or, it may be appropriate to designate the
property , but signal that more flexibility in alteration , addition , or removal is
desirable . Consider adding language that would include other planning objectives
as part of the designation discussion by City Council . Include provisions that staff
will provide information on other planning objectives to the LPC as background
information only , and to the City Council as part of their report and
recommendation . The LPC should continue to consider designation based on
merit only . The discussion of other planning objectives should continue to be
done only at the City Council level .
Also consider how different levels of designation and treatment might interact
with historic properties and citywide planning objectives .
Sec. 14=24. Interim controls
This section includes a provision to place an immediate " hold " on building permits
while a property or district is being considered for landmarking . During the hold ,
permits may only be sought with approval of the City Council . This can cause an
undue burden because staff have no discretion in waiving the hold .
Strategy: Modify the language as it applies to proposed landmarks and historic
districts to allow for flexibility . Rather than limiting permit applications all together ,
establish a base level of holds that , at the time of initiation of landmarking
procedures , places a nominated property (or property within a nominated district)
at the same level of control as an officially designated . Also establish
procedures/criteria for the LPC to have the authority to grant certain pre-defined
exceptions . This should be explained in both text and inserted as a table in the
code for ease of use and clarity of policy . See the appendix of this paper for an
example of such a table . ( Note that a separate section of the code also provides
exceptions for addressing dangerous conditions . )
Winter & Company Page 25
Fort Collins Historic Preservation Program Assessment January 19 , 2010
Draft Report
Article III . Construction , Alterations , Demolitions and Relocations
Sec. 14=46. Work requiring a building permit
Any action on a designated resource requiring a building permit must first receive
a report of acceptability from the LPC . The review of such applications is divided
into two parts : ( 1 ) a conceptual review and (2 ) a final review . The conceptual
review provides an applicant with an understanding of how their project will be
reviewed and what will be required of it early in the design process , prior to the
full project (final ) review . This level of review provides the applicant with
information that may not be readily available otherwise , such as how review
criteria apply to their property .
Strategy: This provision needs to be more broadly communicated to property
owners . Recommendations for public outreach and education materials that
relate to review procedures are addressed in the Draft Process and Policy
Improvement Report .
Also consider permitting the LPC to designate an advisory design review
subcommittee of its body to provide early consultations to applicants and
property owners . These review steps should be illustrated in a chart or diagram in
the ordinance as well as posted on the web and included in other print materials
that explain the process .
Sec. 14=48. Approval of proposed work
This section provides a list of criteria for the Commission to consider when
making their determination of the appropriateness of work that is proposed on a
landmark structure , including the Secretary of the Interiors Standards . However, it
does not explain what the desired outcome of these criteria is , other than
maintaining the resource 's integrity and that the proposed work should be
compatible with the resource .
Strategy: Clarify the criteria for determining appropriateness . The existing criteria
are written as topics to be considered , and not standards to be met . The updated
criteria should continue to draw on the Secretary of the Interiors Standards but
provide more specific direction relating to what is appropriate .
Sec. 14=48. 5. Work not detrimental to historic, architectural or cultural
material; administrative process
This section includes provisions for administrative review by the Director of
Community Development and Neighborhood Services on a select number of
minor project types that would not have negative effects on historic resources .
Project types that can be reviewed by the Director include applications for color
selection , awning re-coverings and minor changes which would not remove , alter ,
cover or destroy any significant features .
Winter & Company Page 26
Fort Collins Historic Preservation Program Assessment January 19 , 2010
Draft Report
Administrative review of minor projects can minimize the use of commission time ,
expedite minor project reviews and provide a degree of clarity to applicants .
Currently administrative review is done at the option of the applicant only .
Clarification and expansion of the administrative review process should be
considered .
Strategy: Expand staff's ability to approve applications in conjunction with
providing clear criteria for review . Establish an expanded base list of actions
approvable at the staff level , and include a provision allowing the LPC to delegate
additional actions to staff for approval . Illustrate this list of actions that can be
permitted by staff in a chart or table as part of a companion document to the code
to provide additional clarity to the public .
Article IV. Demolitions or Relocation of Historic Structures Not Designated
as Fort Collins Landmarks or Located in a Fort Collins Landmark District
Sec. 14= 71. General
14-71 refers to section 203 of the Uniform Building Code and in 1994 , applied to
dangerous or unsafe buildings . The City has adopted new building codes , which
cause this section to no longer be accurate .
Strategy: Update references in both the Land Use Code and the Municipal Code
to match building code updates , including special provisions for historic buildings .
Sec. 14= 72. Procedures for review of applications for demolition or
relocation
Section 14-72 provides for several levels of review in order to explore options for
protecting potential historic resources ( properties 50 years of age or older) from
demolition . The first level is a review by the Director of Community Development
and Neighborhood Services and the Commission Chair in order to determine the
level of eligibility of the property . ( Note that this process is different for buildings
that are a safety hazard , which is addressed in a separate section of the code . )
If they feel the property may have significance that could be adversely affected
by the proposed work , then Commission review is required . Commission review
is conducted in two steps : ( 1 ) a preliminary hearing and (2 ) a final hearing .
At the preliminary hearing for demolition , the commission will consider the effects
of the proposed work as well as any feasible alternatives for protecting the
resource . Once at a final hearing , the commission must either approve (with or
without conditions ) the application , or may delay their decision in order to
consider landmarking the property . Designation as a landmark is the only way the
Winter & Company Page 27
Fort Collins Historic Preservation Program Assessment January 19 , 2010
Draft Report
commission may deny , in its entirety , an application for demolition or relocation of
a property .
The summary of the City's Review Processes for Historic Buildings and
Structures on the City 's website contradicts the process as described in the code .
The website summary states that "Whenever a permit or development application
is sought for a building or structure that is 50 years old or older, the application is
reviewed under Section 14-72 of the Municipal Code , commonly called the
Demolition/Alteration Review Process . " This implies that every permit application
must go through this review application . However , this section requires the LPC
to review applications only for demolition , partial demolition or relocation of a
structure that is fifty years of age or older and which meets one or more of the
designation criteria . Other applications for properties fifty years of age or older
are reviewed by staff under Section 3 . 4 . 7 of the Land Use Code . However ,
applications for alterations on properties of age may be considered ` partial
demolitions , ' based on the definition of a demolition in the code , if they destroy
any part of an eligible resource . " Demolition shall mean any act or process that
destroys in part or in whole an eligible or designated site , structure or object , or a
site , structure or object within an eligible or designated district . "
Strategy: Update Section 14-72 of the Municipal Code to specify that it applies to
alterations as well as demolitions , partial demolitions and relocations . Update the
supplemental policy summary to clarify which element of which code is applicable
based on various project types . Include a diagram to aid in clarification of the
review process .
Further updates to this section may be required based on other
recommendations throughout this report . For example , if different levels of
designation are established , the demolition review process should be tailored
based on those levels of significance .
Currently the LPC Chair has the authority to appoint another member of the
Commission to act for them in the preliminary analysis of potential significance .
The Director of Community Development and Neighborhood Services should also
be given the authority to appoint another member of the preservation planning
staff to represent them in the preliminary analysis of potential significance .
Winter & Company Page 28
Fort Collins Historic Preservation Program Assessment January 19 , 2010
Draft Report
Article V. Landmark Rehabilitation Loan Program
This program is the only historic preservation incentive in the code . The code
does not mention that other incentives may be made available .
Strategy: Generally , specific incentives are not specified in the code , since they
may change over time . However, there should be language that indicates the
City 's intent to offer incentives and benefits when feasible . A new section of the
code should be added with language noting that the City Council may offer
incentives , from time to time , which may include financial and technical
assistance , as well as expedited permitting , as feasible . This language would not
commit the City to providing such incentives , but would signal the intent to
promote preservation through assistance when it is possible , through grants or
other means .
3 . Other Code Observations and Issues
This section provides a summary of key observations and issues that are not
directly related to specific code sections .
Levels of Preservation Review
Several different levels and types of review on historic properties occur. While
these are clearly defined in the various sections of the codes , it is not readily
apparent which kind of review is applicable to a certain project type . For example ,
administrative review can happen in two ways : by just the Director of Community
Development and Neighborhood Services , or by the Director and the Chair of the
Commission .
Strategy: Clarification of the preservation review process should be provided as
part of a companion guide to the code that help the public understand the
process . Include simple flow charts and other visual aids .
Design Standards and Guidelines
The signs section of the Municipal Code references the City 's Design Guidelines
for Old Town as part of the application review criteria ; however, these guidelines
are not referenced in any of the other review criteria throughout the code .
Strategy: In addition to referencing the Secretary of the Interiors Standards it is
important to have the ability to adopt design guidelines or standards , including
those for specific resource types found in Fort Collins . Provide language stating
that the City may adopt design guidelines to aid in interpreting the criteria set
forth in Municipal Code Chapter 14 : Landmark Preservation .
Winter & Company Page 29
Fort Collins Historic Preservation Program Assessment January 19 , 2010
Draft Report
Contributing Resources
The code refers to contributing resources several times . In practice , these are
considered to have a lower level of significance , but their treatment is not clear.
The definition of "eligibility" lists "contributing to a district" as a separate level of
eligibility for designation . These two concepts should not be combined . It
confuses the definition . In most communities , " contributing " properties are those
that gain their significance from being part of a set of resources that tell a story . A
row of houses in a block is an example . They may all have a high degree of
integrity , but they are not individually significant . However, the code lacks clear
policies for the treatment or designation of a contributing resource .
Strategy: If the City is to have different levels of significance , they should be
more logically named and more clearly defined . A system for tiered designations
should be clearly established , with definitions of each designation included . The
link to the degree of review that occurs for each level of significance also should
be made clear. See the Draft Process and Policy Improvement Report for more
information on recommended strategies for tiered designations .
Demolition
Land Use Code 3 . 4 . 7 ( E ) Relocation or Demolition overlaps with Municipal Code
14-72 . An overlap between Land Use Code 3 .4 . 7 ( C ) and Municipal Code Section
14-5 for the determination of Landmark Eligibility also occurs ; however, the
conflict is minimized as 3 . 4 . 7 ( C ) references the criteria in Section 14-5 .
Strategy: Add a reference in Land Use Code 3 . 4 . 7 ( E ) to the Municipal Code 14-
72 policies for relocations and demolitions .
Regulations on Non -designated Properties
Two sections of the code require review of unlisted , individually eligible
properties , Municipal Code 14-72 and Land Use Code 3 .4 . 7 . This is potentially
confusing .
Strategy: Clarify the difference between the two sections of the code and make
clear which is required and how each section is applied . Where possible , tables
should be used to visually clarify regulations .
New Provisions
In addition to the improvements described above , best practices in preservation
indicate that emerging preservation trends should also be addressed in the
ordinance .
Winter & Company Page 30
Fort Collins Historic Preservation Program Assessment January 19 , 2010
Draft Report
Strategy: Provide new code language to address trends in best practices in
preservation including ;
• Language referencing the role that historic resources play in sustainability ,
resource conservation and energy efficiency . Establish as a role of the LPC
to advise the City on preservation 's role in citywide sustainability objectives .
See the Draft Process and Policy Improvement Report for further
recommendations on preservation and sustainability initiatives .
• Language providing for a Conservation District option . Conservation districts
focus on maintaining the traditional building scale and character of a
neighborhood . They use special zoning standards , and sometimes design
review guidelines , that focus on new construction and additions . These can
often be administered at the permitting counter . Conservation district
language should include clearly defined differences in the levels of review for
a conservation district as compared to a historic district . See the Draft
Process and Policy Improvement Report for more information on
conservation districts .
Organization
Simple formatting updates should be made to increase the ease of use and
understanding of the code .
Strategy:
• Include tables and other graphics to clarify requirements (see the appendix
for an example table ) .
• Format text in bulleted lists where appropriate to increase legibility .
• Move Sec . 14-5 , Standards for determining the eligibility for designation of
sites , structures , objects and districts for preservation , to Article II :
Designation Procedure .
Definitions
Some of the definitions found in the Municipal Code contain circular references
with other definitions . Others reference or imply a requirement not clearly
conveyed in the code language . These include the definitions of contributing to a
district , eligibility and landmark or landmark district , as well as possible confusion
between alterations and partial demolitions . The definition of exterior integrity
implies that a certain level of integrity is required in order to landmark a resource
based on its level of significance . This is not clarified in the eligibility criteria
section of the code . The integrity of a resource is also not listed as a criterion for
review of proposed alterations , demolitions , etc . The definitions should be
updated to reflect desired policies .
Winter & Company Page 31
Fort Collins Historic Preservation Program Assessment January 19 , 2010
Draft Report
Strategy: Update the definitions to match recommendations in this report
including ;
• Clarify levels of designation in definitions , including national , state and all
levels of local designation .
• Update the definitions of `eligibility ' and ` eligible resource ' to match
designation levels .
• Clarify the definition of integrity and its use in the eligibility criteria section of
the code , and add it as a criterion for review of proposed alterations .
C . Operating Procedures
1 . Clarify the preservation review process .
Preservation review should be more closely coordinated with other development
reviews .
• Establish provisions to include preservation staff's comments early in
development review .
• Incorporate preservation and 50-year reviews in the city 's development
review chart and process . ( It does not appear there at present . )
• Diagram the landmarks designation and design review processes . (This
exists in text form , but is not easy to understand . )
I Update development review documents to reflect the 50 -year
question .
At present, the city 's Development Review Flowchart omits any reference to
historic preservation review , or to properties that are 50 years old . This means
that property owners can be "surprised " to learn that their project has an extra
review step .
Furthermore , the city 's application forms for development review lack any
questions related to building age . This means that owners are not alerted to the
fact that this may be an issue , and it means that staff must conduct more
research to determine building age . The forms also should include information
that makes it easier to locate the property in other city records . The address
should be identified by street address , and also by lot and block number.
3 . Coordinate Section 106 reviews .
The city has no designated official to manage Section 106 reviews . This is a part
of the National Historic Preservation Act that requires consideration of the effects
that any federal undertaking may have on certain historic properties . Public works
projects may often fall under this provision . For example , if a road improvement
project involves widening the street and properties on or eligible for National
Register listing may be affected , then those effects must be considered . Typically
the project can be permitted and executed , but the evaluation must consider
ways to protect the resources and mitigate any potential negative impacts .
Winter & Company Page 32
Fort Collins Historic Preservation Program Assessment January 19 , 2010
Draft Report
The Section 106 review occurs with the State Historic Preservation Officer. At
present , if any project involving federal funds is proposed , the department
responsible for the project is assumed to be the party that must coordinate this
review for the city . This means that staff unfamiliar with the process may be
involved , and delays can occur. In many communities , a single contact point is
established to assure timely review and compliance with the regulation . The city
should identify the preservation office as the coordinator for Section 106 reviews .
4 . Monitor preservation review and permitting .
An annual tracking/reporting system is needed , as a supplement to the annual
CLG reports , to track the efficiency and predictability of the preservation review
system . This would document the number and types of projects reviewed , as well
as their outcomes and the length of time they were in the process .
5 . Expand administrative review procedures .
Project types that can be reviewed by the Director of Advance Planning are
specified in the code . Clarification and expansion of the administrative review
process should be considered to increase the efficiency of preservation review .
Actions:
• Update development review application form to include questions relative to
preservation including the age of the building and its existing historic status
( if any) .
• Update development review flow chart to include preservation review and 50-
year review .
• Publish a simplified description (flow chart) of the preservation review and
landmark/district designation processes .
• Designate the preservation office as the official coordinator for Section 106
reviews .
• Establish an annual report form for preservation review and permits as a
supplement to the existing CLG report .
• Expand staff's ability to approve minor applications .
D . Resource Surveys
The historic significance of a property is typically determined by professionals
trained in architectural history who apply consistent criteria . Ideally , older portions
of the city would be surveyed comprehensively to identify properties that are
historically significant. That information is then made readily available to property
owners .
However, Fort Collins , as with most cities , has not committed the resources
needed to conduct a citywide survey . Funding typically occurs in small
increments , and then selected areas are surveyed as the funds become
Winter & Company Page 33
Fort Collins Historic Preservation Program Assessment January 19 , 2010
Draft Report
available . ( See the Peer Community Review paper for examples of the status of
surveys in some other communities . )
Note that the time period during which properties may be considered to have the
potential for historic significance continues to move forward . The 50-year
threshold that the city uses for demolition review is one that is often applied as a
first filter before evaluating a property for significance . As time progresses , other
properties reach this threshold . While doing so does not automatically bestow
historic significance , it does mean that the need to survey is ongoing .
When survey information is not available , determinations of significance are
made on a case- by-case basis , again using adopted criteria . This is the process
that planning staff employ when a property older than 50 years is proposed for
demolition . They evaluate the property using adopted criteria . This can appear
mysterious to lay people , and can lead to frustration when the professional 's
finding contradicts the owner's expectations .
1 . Improve the availability of existing survey information .
Publish existing surveys on the city 's web site and link them to GIS data systems .
Include lists and maps of all currently listed properties and all properties over 50
years of age .
2 . Expand the city ' s survey program to cover most of the older
portions of the city .
Give priority to areas where redevelopment pressures exist .
3 . Refine the city ' s survey form to include more information useful
to property owners .
A key concept in historic preservation is to retain the " key features" of a property
that give it significance . This information should be included in the survey form to
help property owners understand which features need protection and which
portions of the property may be less important , thereby indicating where flexibility
may be appropriate .
4 . Develop more context statements .
As a prelude to surveying , the city uses brief historic overviews related to a
particular theme of development or a geographic area . This describes the
relationship of built resources to the social and cultural history of the community ,
identifies the typical property types that are likely to be involved , and suggests
areas where these resources are most likely to occur. These help serve as a
basis for planning , in terms of predicting where historic resources are likely to be
found , and in setting priorities for historic surveys .
Winter & Company Page 34
Fort Collins Historic Preservation Program Assessment January 19 , 2010
Draft Report
5 . Provide a " predictive model " to enable owners to gain a
preliminary indication of the potential historic significance of any un -
surveyed property .
While it is desirable to have a formal survey already on hand , it may be possible
to craft some user-friendly "self-test" that could be available over the internet
which would enable property owners to gain a preview of the potential
significance of their property . The city should provide information on the web that
will help people develop their own preliminary estimate of the potential
significance of a property . This may take the form of a checklist that includes
some of the basic criteria that are typically used in determining significance , with
explanations that facilitate use by lay people .
Actions:
• Publicize all surveys on the city 's website .
• Conduct additional surveys , place emphasis on areas targeted for
redevelopment or where substantial demolition is occurring or anticipated .
• Review options for implementing an updated survey system including
information on key character-defining features of a building and relating to a
proposed tiered system for designation .
• Develop additional context statements .
• Establish a web- based predictive model for property owners to make their
own initial determination of the historic significance of their property .
E . Design Guidelines
1 . Publish design guidelines for the treatment of historic properties .
" Fear of the unknown " is a key concern . That is , property owners and developers
who are considering acquiring property may resist a finding that their property
has historic significance , because they believe that the requirements for
treatment of a historic resource will be too restrictive .
Clearly written , well - illustrated design guidelines can help remove some of the
mystery associated with the treatment of historic properties . With advance
guidance , an owner can develop an appropriate approach for the treatment of
their historic property . These guidelines should provide information about
alterations for historic buildings that are officially designated as such under city
ordinances . They also should outline options for design that will help users
understand the range of flexibility that may be available for treatment of certain
properties .
Guidelines will provide clarity and help people make decisions early . The
guidelines should address new , emerging issues such as energy conservation
and " recent past" resources .
Winter & Company Page 35
Fort Collins Historic Preservation Program Assessment January 19 , 2010
Draft Report
Guidelines should also address how development review occurs on properties
abutting historic districts . This is required in the land use code , but the criteria for
review are not defined .
2 . Update the Design Guidelines for the Old Town Historic District .
The existing guidelines are very brief, primarily setting forth basic principles for
treatment of historic commercial buildings and compatible new construction .
While brevity can imply flexibility , it can also signal lack of predictability .
More detail can in fact clarify areas of flexibility , as well as defining more
specifically appropriate and inappropriate design actions .
An update would help to streamline review of projects within the district . By
providing more clarity , additional design actions may also be approved
administratively , thereby reducing meeting agendas for the commission .
Actions:
• Adopt city-wide preservation design guidelines .
• Adopt city-wide design guidelines for areas abutting historic districts .
• Update the Old Town Design Guidelines .
F . Compliance Process
A clear working relationship should be established between preservation
planning staff and code enforcement staff. Clear documentation of what has been
approved should be provided to enforcement staff to be used in conjunction with
site inspections . A documentation format for succinctly listing the conditions of
approval should be developed as a joint effort of preservation staff and
enforcement personnel . This will make it easier for staff in the field to confirm
compliance with the terms of the certificate of appropriateness .
Actions:
• Create and implement the use of a compliance-tracking form to aid
enforcement staff in site inspections for preservation - related projects .
G . Incentives and Benefits
The city 's existing incentives are very limited and , in general , fall short of those
offered by similar communities .
Actions:
• Expand the city 's historic preservation incentive program .
Winter & Company Page 36
Fort Collins Historic Preservation Program Assessment January 19 , 2010
Draft Report
H . Training , Education and Outreach
In the absence of other supporting organizations , the city needs to engage in
more outreach and training programs .
I . Provide staff training .
All planning staff should receive a basic orientation to the preservation system
and the principles involved , such that they can better understand the program
and advise applicants on their options . Similarly , preservation staff should be
engaged in an orientation program directed at how they can participate in sub-
area planning effectively and how to take other planning objectives into
consideration when developing policies for those areas .
2 . Provide training to the Landmark Preservation Commission .
Establish an on -going program to train the LPC . This should include the city 's
preservation policies and review system as well as best practices in preservation
planning .
3 . Publish all preservation -related information on the web .
This should include surveys of individual properties , historic contexts , maps and
design guidelines . Educational materials such as brochures should be made
available . Case studies illustrating successful solutions should also be provided .
Actions:
• Establish a preservation planning and review training program for planning
staff.
• Establish a training program for the LPC .
• Make all preservation information available on the city 's website .
• Publish informational brochure on preservation 's role in sustainability
practices .
Winter & Company Page 37
Fort Collins Historic Preservation Program Assessment January 19 , 2010
Draft Report
IV . IMPLEMENTATION PHASING TABLE
The following table is a summary of the recommended system improvements
including a proposed phasing schedule for their implementation . The phases are
roughly based on the number of years it will take to implement an action . Phases
for each action have been determined by prioritizing those that will have the
greatest or most immediate impact, as well as by considering the relative ease of
their implementation .
City of Fort Collins Preservation System Enhancements
Recommended Implementation Phasing
ACTION Year 1 -2* Year 2-3* Year 3-4* Year 4-5*
Policy Directives
Develop a preservation and sustainability On-going On-going On-going On-going
initiative
Include preservation in City Plan update Draft Adopt
Update sub-area plans to include Review Amend
preservation
Evaluate tools for recent past resources Strategy Adopt
Evaluate neighborhood character Strategy Implement
management tools
Adopt a tiered rating system Draft Adopt
Ordinances
Update existing Adopt
Develop new Strategy Adopt
Operating Procedures
Update development review application Amend
form
Update development review flow chart Amend
Publish a preservation review/designation Publish
flow chart
Designate 106 review coordinator Adopt
Establish an annual preservation review Adopt On-going On-going On-going
report form
Expand staff's ability to approve minor Adopt
applications
Resource Surveys
Publicize all surveys on the city 's website Digitize Publish
Conduct additional surveys Survey A Survey B Survey C Survey D
Update survey system with key features Update
Develop additional context statements Topic A Topic B Topic C Topic D
Develop predictive model for property Draft Implement
owners
Design Guidelines
Adopt city-wide preservation design Funding Draft Adopt
guidelines
Adopt city-wide design guidelines for edges Funding Draft Adopt
of districts
Winter & Company Page 38
Fort Collins Historic Preservation Program Assessment January 19 , 2010
Draft Report
Update Old Town design guidelines Funding Draft Adopt
Compliance Process
Develop compliance-tracking form for
preservation projects AdoptT On -going On -going On -going
Incentives & Benefits JIM
Expand incentives program Strategy Implement
Education & Outrea
Establish training program for planning staff Part 1 Part 2
Establish training program for the LPC Part 1 Part 2
Publish all preservation information on city
Digitize Publish
website
Publish preservation and sustainability Develop Publish
brochure
" Improvements will be implemented as resources permit.
Winter & Company Page 39
Fort Collins Historic Preservation Program Assessment January 19 , 2010
Draft Report
V . APPENDICES
A . Example Tables
The following are examples of how tables can be used to provide increased ease
of use and clarity of policies in the code . Such tables can either be integrated into
the code itself or published separately as part of a companion document to the
code . These tables are illustrative examples only .
1 . Interim Controls Example Table
Actions Permitted During Consideration for Designation as a Local Historic Resource :
Type of Action Permit Required? Permitted By :
No (1) Yes (2) LP C Director
Demolition - Complete
Potential Individual Landmark X X
Potential Contributor X X
Potential Non-contributor X X
Demolition - Partial
Remove Non-contributing X X
Other Partial Demo X X
Addition
Rear X X
Roof X X
Side X X
Front X X
Alteration - Minor
Replace window in kind X
Replace siding in kind X
All other minor alterations X X
Alteration - Major
Wall surface X X
Roof X X
Porch X X
Replace window - new type X X
Cover original siding X X
All other major alterations X X
Repair
Patch or repaint X
Replace in kind X
Repair window X
All other repairs X X
Maintenance
Painting in same color X
Cleaning X
Resecuring X
All other maintenance X X
Other Actions
All other actions X X
Winter & Company Page 40
Fort Collins Historic Preservation Program Assessment January 19 , 2010
Draft Report
2 , Resource Types Example Table
This type of table would be used as part of a tiered system of significance and
review . It outlines potential levels of significance and links them to treatment
policies . The property ratings are in general terms to provide a clear distinction of
significance . However , should such a system be adopted more information
should be provided relating to local designations in additional to the National
Register designations shown .
Property Rating Treatment Objectives Notes
Type 1
Highest level of significance, Require preservation, to High priority for
individually eligible for National maximum extent feasible. assistance and incentives .
Register listing.
Type 2
High level of significance, eligible Require preservation, to High priority for
as a contributor for National maximum extent feasible. assistance and incentives .
Register listing.
Type 3
Moderate level of significance . Encourage preservation Provide incentives, but
when feasible. may consider mitigation
alternatives when other
compelling city objectives
exist.
Type 4
Non-contributor, but retrievable as Encourage restoration. Provide some incentives .
a historic resource, as owner's
option.
Type 5
Non-contributor, with no potential No preservation expected. Demolition or alteration
significance. (New building or one permitted after 50 -year
substantially altered.) consideration.
Winter & Company Page 41
Fort Collins Historic Preservation Program Assessment January 19 , 2010
Draft Report
B . Integrated Review
The following is an example from Pasadena , CA of how preservation review and
design review are integrated . Pasadena uses one application form for both types
of review , and the form includes a section for staff to provide information on the
historic significance of the property .
PASADENA PERMIT CENTER
Yt
Design and Historic Preservation Section
MASTER APPLICATION FORM
Design Review (C •,. 17 .61 .030 P.M.C. )
Certificate of Appropriateness (Ch. 17 .62 .090 P ht .C . !
Project Address
Project Name
Project Description
Applicant CAmitinect OContractor Developer her
name: phone:
address : fax
city: slate: zip code: email:
Applicant Signature: Date:
i.now r the appacant is other than the propery owner, "pareta signed owner authoreation is requiradi
Architect or U Designer (for design review projects)
name: phone:
address . tax:
city. slate: zip cods: email:
Property Owner
+ name: — phone:
address: fax.-
city: slate rip code: email:
Primary Contact Person: CYAppllcant U Architect U Property Owner
' Proposed Work
_ new construction _ molt Qdemolbw _relocation - restorationhehabilaation additiDnlalteration osignlawni
Project information (for staff use onwi
PLN Review Authority Historic Preservation Review TD" of Design Review
PR,i ❑ staff ❑ Category t (d9eignated) ❑ conecept design review
staff ind,als: O Design Commission ❑ Category 2 (elrgrbie) n final design review
dale ascuoled: ❑ M•stcrc t'reserration Comm. ❑ consolidated design review
date submittals reed: _
fee: $ CEOA Review Landmark/Historic District Tree Removal Public AR
notification: $ ❑ Exemot n Yes ❑ yes
3% records be: $ ❑ Pending district name ❑ no ❑ no
TOTAL: S ❑ Completed ❑ 00mr4awd
DHPMasterApp.doc Rev: 3128/08
MA04MWA40D1LVr10PIWNt iLVM I N %' .: 1.; : :"44111 ' c; r,: r..r,. .aa-qrN
DE9AMM1D 04STOPoC PWSERVATIW SEC707r. r4CA E%A r .� c Qs T:a-t765
Winter & Company Page 42
Fort Collins Historic Preservation Program Assessment January 19 , 2010
Draft Report
C . Guideline Flexibility and Ease of Use
The following is an example from Deadwood , SD of their draft Historic Design
Guidelines . These sheets are examples of how guidelines can be made user
friendly and identify a range of flexibility .
ALTERED BUILDING , RECOVERABLE COMMERCIAL STOREFRONT ,
I have an altered historic commercial building front , but it is recoverable , what
can I do ?
Existing Condition
VIEW kkkkkkkkkkkk
^' Opgbn 1 " Option 2 ti Option 3
71
-� � it , - � •,• . •, .
Whan should I usa this Whan should I imp. this Whan r<hrneld I uxa thin
approach? approach ? approach?
• The building is highly sign- • The building is a contributor to • There is subs*antial deteriora-
cane a district tion makirg ' Option 1 " difficult
• There is good historical informa- • Thorp is Iw.cs histnrical in - • Them is lace hictnric infnrma
tion about the desigr fnrmatinn nvailahip ahnut the. tion about the origiral design
a Thp noiri~ rngte•.rialcarrlrrafts- original design The cortext has more variety
rn pr ara availabirr. • The budget is more limited
• The project budget permits • The work will be phased
• The context has mare intact
historic buildings
Winter & Company Page 43
Fort Collins Historic Preservation Program Assessment January 19 , 2010
Draft Report
ALTERED BUILDING , RECOVERABLE RESIDENTIAL PORCH :
I have an altered historic residential building that is recoverable , what can I do ?
I� =TTroll
� r
oi
M 4 a v - a' I
. . . 7 - " .
When should I use this When should I use this Whon should I use this
approach ? approach ? approach?
• VorV significanv. • Contributes to the district • Suhstantial detAnoratinn
• Good historical background • Less historical background • Less historic background
rformatior information information
• Craftsmar are available • Limited budget • Fits rnrtart
• Budget permits • PhasPr
• Cnntnw? is irtam
Winter & Company Page 44
Fort Collins Historic Preservation Program Assessment January 19 , 2010
Draft Report
EVALUATING KEY FEATURES= WINDOWS :
i
My windows need work , what should I
'y_�' do?
El F I_ I The buiidinq feature should be evaluated in :he followinq
sequence:
`` 1 ff _ l • Preserve
Repair
Replace
JI j Pi1•• I •II II . � . _
Location A: Windows on Primary Wall
Preservation and repair it place is :he priority
PRIMARY FACADE
Location B : Highty visible Secondary Wall
Preservation and repair it place is :he oriority
f Location C : Not highly visible Secondary Wall
Preservation is preferreo
N I • Replacement or alteratior is acceptable
SEcomum FACADE
- — _ Location D : Tertiary Wall
_ - Replacement or alteratior is acceptable
1 �
t _
fw
TERTIARY FACADE
Winter & Company Page 45
Fort Collins Historic Preservation Program Assessment January 19 , 2010
Draft Report
- SOLAR PANELS ON HISTORIC BUILDINGS :
I have a historic residential building and
_ = would like to add some solar panels , what
should I do?
Existing Condition :
Gab;e facing Street
r
Side is South facirg
Ito
Emm Comm
Preferred :
r \y � • PAnNL¢ cnthank fmm the roof
I_ 1;�� • PeneLe are flnch with the mnf
~ r ' � 1 .
OPTION A: PREFERREC
— — _ _ _ _ Acceptable:
• Panels setback from cave . but closer to the front
• Panels are flush with *he mof
E3
OPTION B: ACCFPTARt F
Winter & Company Page 46
ATTACHMENT 2
Peer Community Review October 9, 2009
Fort Collins Preservation System Improvement Project
The City of Fort Collins is engaged in an evaluation of the development review process
as it relates to treatment of historic resources. As part of this evaluation several peer
community preservation programs were reviewed for comparable and innovative
program elements.
Peer Community Review
This paper is the second of two that review programs in peer communities. The first
provides an overview of the preservation codes and programs for a list of 21 identified
peer communities. For more information, please see the Peer Communities List. Based
on the results of this information, several communities were selected for more thorough
review of key areas of their preservation programs. The peer communities reviewed in
this report include: Ann Arbor, MI, Aspen, CO, Monterey, CA, and Pasadena, CA. The
preservation programs for these cities were examined based on a list of ten key topics,
as well as for any unique elements relevant to possible improvements to the Ft. Collins
program. The key topics include:
1. Development Review Process
How does the permitting process work for officially listed historic resources? How does
it interface with other development reviews in the city?
2. Delegated Decision-Making
How is decision-making authority assigned? Can some projects be approved
administratively or by a sub-committee?
3. Consideration of Unlisted Properties 50 Years Old
Does the City review work on properties that are of an established age, but which are
not listed formally as historic resources?
4. Demolition Review
How is demolition review conducted for properties that are not officially listed as local
landmarks?
5. Structures of Merit
Does the City have a category that recognizes properties of historic significance, but
stops short of official landmarking?
6. Surveys
Does the City use a survey system that indicates different levels of significance? If so,
how is this linked to design review and permitting? Are there any innovative ways in
which surveys are being applied?
Winter& Company Page 1
Peer Community Review October 9, 2009
7. Incentives
Does the City offer incentives or provide special benefits for properties that are listed as
historic resources? If so, what are they? Which are most successful? Are other
incentives being considered?
8. Sustainability
In what ways is sustainability a factor in the preservation program? Does it appear in the
design guidelines? In other policies?
9. Economic Development
Is economic development a part of the preservation program? How does the
preservation program interact with other economic development initiatives?
10. Recent Past Resources
How is the City addressing recent past resources? Are they listed and reviewed the
same as older properties, or are there special categories of listing or different
guidelines?
11. Other Program Components
Are there any unique elements or strategies in the preservation program?
I. ANN ARBOR, MICHIGAN
The city of An Arbor (population 115,092) has recently developed urban design
standards and guidelines for the greater downtown area, portions of which are historic
districts. The seven member historic district commission reviews all projects in historic
districts, including the entirety of the exterior of a building as well as yard and open
space features. The City's preservation ordinance includes protection from demolition
by neglect, and provisions for `Undue Financial Hardship' for alterations in addition to
demolitions. The City is also promoting green building policies.
1. Development Review Process
Ann Arbor only designates historic districts, and not individual resources, although there
are several districts that have only one property in them. When an application for work
on a property within a historic district is received it is referred directly to preservation
staff. Prior to application for Historic District Commission (HDC) Review, the Historic
Preservation Officer may meet with applicants to review proposed projects. Roughly
75% of applications take advantage of this prior to submitting their formal application for
HDC review.
HDC review is based. primarily on criteria in the code and on the Secretary of the
Interiors Standards. However, the City has prepared historic design guidelines that are
expected to be adopted. These guidelines are currently being used for illustrative
purposed during the optional meeting with staff, similar to how voluntary design
guidelines may be used.
Winter& Company Page 2
Peer Community Review October 9, 2009
The code prescribes the same treatment for contributing and non-contributing
properties, however, there are certain allowances for more flexibility in the review
criteria for non-contributing properties, such as with review of alteration to details and
more actions that qualify for administrative approval. Treatment for contributing and
non-contributing resources is also different in the proposed design guidelines.
2. Delegated Decision-Making
Ann Arbor's code allows for administrative approval for specified minor classes of work.
Currently the HPC has listed 30 actions approvable by the City Historic Preservation
Officer. All other work on properties within a historic district must be reviewed by the
HDC, whose opinion is final, and appealable to the State Historic Preservation Review
Board.
3. Consideration of Unlisted Properties 50 Years Old
Age is one factor considered in determining the level of significance of a property within
a Historic District, but Ann Arbor does not use it as a criterion in.any other preservation
regulations.
4. Demolition Review
There is no demolition review for projects outside of a historic district.
5. Structures of Merit
The City does not have a list of structures of merit. However, they had a district made
up of individual properties of significance for which designation was repealed. The list of
these properties formerly in the district is awaiting appropriate action for inclusion in any
future districts.
6. Surveys
Surveys are only conducted on historic districts to determine which properties within the
district are contributing and non-contributing. When considering adopting a new district,
the HDC will appoint a study committee who will do a basic study of the proposed area.
This is not a formal survey.
7. Incentives
Ann Arbor does not have an incentive program. This is partially due to a lower level of
necessity for such program elements, as the City does not designate an individual
property, only a district.
8. Sustainability
The City of Ann Arbor has talked a lot about sustainability; however, little action has
been taken. The most likely future action will be to include sustainability in the planned
revision of its master plans. The yet to be adopted historic design guidelines include
policies for sustainable design in new construction in historic districts. The City expects
that as their master plans are updated, sustainability objectives will be written into the
plan's policies. Staff is in the process of publishing a brochure on energy efficiency in
historic buildings.
Winter& Company Page 3
Peer Community Review October 9, 2009
9. Economic Development
There is no organized economic development plan for the city; it is divided into pieces in
several different City departments. The current preservation officer assists with the
brownfields program.
10. Recent Past Resources
Ann Arbor has numerous mid-century modern buildings that many citizens would
support preservation of. However, the City has not taken action taken toward a historic
district including such properties.
11. Other Program Components
Demolition of Properties within a District:
Within a district only properties determined not significant, or to have lost their integrity,
may be demolished. Demolition may also be allowed in the case of undue financial
hardship, or if retaining the structure is found to be a hazard to public safety or will deter
a major improvement project of significant benefit to the public. Very few applications for
demolition have been submitted for approval based on the interest of the community,
and very few of these have been approved.
II. ASPEN, COLORADO
The City of Aspen (population 5,914) has preservation design guidelines and three
classifications of historic review. Aspen has also integrated the protection of recent past
resources into its preservation program. The City publishes a historic preservation fact
sheet describing what projects are reviewed, and has identified design objectives for
historic districts. Aspen has also recently adopted a list of, and regulations for, potential
historic resources.
1. Development Review Process
Historic development review in Aspen is only applicable to designated properties. There
are three classifications of review on historic properties: (1) exempt, (2) minor and (3)
significant. The Community Development Director may approve a project on an exempt
property. These properties are identified according to criteria in the Land Use Code. A
minor development approval is needed for development on a historic property that
doesn't qualify as exempt. This level of review requires a public hearing before the
Historic Preservation Commission. A Significant Development approval is required for a
major alteration, addition, or demolition of an existing historic property. A Significant
Development Approval requires two public hearings before the Historical Preservation
Commission, one for the conceptual development plan and one for the final
development plan.
2. Delegated Decision-Making
The lowest of the three review levels defined in the code is a staff-only review. The
City's historic preservation staff does its best to keep review at the staff level, and most
people seem satisfied with the system.
Winter& Company Page 4
Peer Community Review October 9, 2009
3. Consideration of Unlisted Properties 50 Years Old
Aspen does not use a 50-year mark in their designation criteria. The City did not
previously have an age criterion; however, once they began designating recent past
resources they initiated two, one at 30 years and one at 100 years. These represent two
distinct periods of significance in Aspen's development, between which there was very
little development. The 30-year mark represents the post-war building boom, and is also
near the median age of the buildings proposed for demolition. Buildings determined
significant under either age criterion are currently treated the same. However, Aspen is
considering a tiered system which would no longer use age as a criterion, and bases
designation on three levels of significance which are determined based on a point
system.
4. Demolition Review
Aspen can deny demolition of designated properties only, including non-contributing
properties within a historic district. In general, there are no special provisions for non-
designated properties. However, there is a list of potentially historic resources.
Properties on this list maybe be subject to a 90-day demolition hold. (See Structures of
Merit discussion.)
5. Structures of Merit
The City of Aspen has adopted by ordinance a List of Potentially Historic Resources.
These properties are subject to a 90-day hold on development applications in order to
determine their historic significance. This list is a temporary measure while a citizen task
force examines the City's preservation system, and updates are considered. While the
ordinance is in effect, only voluntary designation of the listed potential historic resources
may occur. There is no specific date at which the ordinance and its list will expire.
6. Surveys
The City's code previously required a survey every five years, but this was repealed in
2002. Completed surveys have identified the majority of the Victorian era resources, as
well as many of the city's 20th century resources. The small size of the city means that
the majority of its resources have been surveyed and identified.
7. Incentives
The City has a strong incentive program that many have taken advantage of. The most
prominent incentives are a floor area ratio bonus and a historic lot split, allowing
subdivision of a property, which staff feels are the primary reasons for many voluntary
designations. Other incentives include financial and development benefits as well as
technical assistance and preservation recognition programs.
8. Sustainability
Aspen has green building standards that apply to all construction projects, including
historic properties. These standards are applied with more flexibility for historic
properties.
Winter&Company Page 5
Peer Community Review October 9, 2009
9. Economic Development
Aspen does not have an economic development program.
10. Recent Past Resources
Aspen has fully integrated recent past resources with their preservation program. Their
criteria for designation are specifically tailored to both their Victorian era resources and
their recent past (20th century) resources.
11. Other Program Components
Program Maintenance:
Since the most recent preservation ordinance update the Community Development
Department and members of the HPC have met with City Council annually to discuss
unprotected 20th century era properties and the successes and challenges of the
preservation program.
Potential Updates:
Aspen is considering a three-tier system to replace the existing program which would
assign a point rating to a property based on its level of significance and integrity. In this
system only the highest rated properties would be able to be designated without owner
consent, but would also qualify for additional incentive programs. The lowest tier would
have more flexibility in requirements for design review.
III. MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA
The City of Monterey (population 30,641) has both a historic master plan and a historic
preservation ordinance as well as an ongoing survey program. Monterey uses the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) development review process, which
includes consideration of effects of proposed projects on historically eligible properties.
1. Development Review Process
Monterey has two levels of historic zoning designation based on significance: H-1 and
H-2. The H-1 zoning designation is applied to properties of the highest level of
significance, and may be designated without owner consent. H-2 designation requires
owner consent. All designated properties are subject to preservation review based on
the Secretary of the Interior's Standards. For projects other than minor repairs a Historic
Preservation Report and hearing before the Historic Preservation Commission are
required. The Historic Preservation Report is adopted by the commission and includes
information about the significance of a property and a program for its preservation.
2. Delegated Decision-Making
Staff can review minor repairs and the historic preservation commission reviews major
projects.
3. Consideration of Unlisted Properties 50 Years Old
Age is only used as a criterion for historic designation. However, potentially historic,
non-designated properties can be subject to preservation review. Properties which are
Winter& Company Page 6
Peer Community Review October 9, 2009
listed in a survey, or which are determined to potentially meet the criteria for Historic
Zoning by the Deputy City Manager of Plans and Public Works are subject to historic
review based on a separate code section than designated properties. Staff reviews
alterations based on the Secretary of the Interior's Standards. If staff determines the
standards have not been met, a further level of review is required. These properties are
also subject to CEQA review.
4. Demolition Review
Properties which are listed in a survey, or which are determined to potentially meet the
criteria for Historic Zoning by the Deputy City Manager of Plans and Public Works, are
subject to a demolition delay and CEQA review. After the demolition delay a permit for
demolition may be granted only if it is concurrent with approval of a replacement
structure.
5. Structures of Merit
The City has two levels of official designation; however, there is no official designation
below landmarking for properties of merit. (See development review process
discussion.)
6. Surveys
Monterey uses two levels of surveys: (1) reconnaissance and (2) intensive. All
properties identified in a reconnaissance survey are included on the Reconnaissance
Survey List and all properties identified by an intensive survey with potential to meet
criteria for historic zoning are included in the Adopted Survey List. These lists are used
to help determine which non-designated properties are subject to historic review. (See
consideration of unlisted properties discussion.)
7. Incentives
Monterey offers a use-permit based zoning incentive for designated properties that can
include modification to underlying zoning requirements for setbacks, parking standards,
and/or floor area ratio. Additional uses are allowed by permit for designated properties
as well. Designated properties are also eligible for the State Historical Building Code,
the State's Mills Act Property Tax Reduction Program, as well as City grants and other
programs.
8. Sustainability
Monterey's preservation program does not include policies for sustainability.
9. Economic Development
Monterey's preservation program does not include specific policies relating to economic
development. However, staff considers heritage tourism as an important aspect to the
preservation program and it's continued community support.
10. Recent Past Resources
To qualify for historic designation, properties in Monterey must be at least 50 years old.
Most preservation support in Monterey is for the oldest resources, such as the mission
Winter& Company Page 7
Peer Community Review October 9, 2009
era adobes. However, staff has recently begun to make efforts to expand the public
perception to other eras and types of resources.
11. Other Program Components
Conservation District:
In 2004, Monterey established the Cannery Row Conservation District and its
associated Design Guidelines. The conservation district was adopted as a tool to
establish a framework for allowing Cannery Row to grow and change while retaining its
ambiance and historical context. While respecting the traditional character of the area is
emphasized, change is anticipated and alterations and new construction are required to
respect the traditional design context. Regulations for the district apply to improvement
projects including new buildings and alterations to existing structures.
Historic District:
Upon designation of a historic district a District Preservation Plan is also adopted. This
plan includes goals and objects for the district as well as specific development
regulations for construction within the district. The underlying zoning may be modified
by the plan to be more or less restrictive including design, mass, bulk, height, walls,
lighting, driveway locations, parking standards, landscaping, sign, public improvements
on the property, and eligibility for incentives. Districts can be based on a H-1 or H-2
zoning with a base level of owner consent required for those based on H-2 zoning.
IV. PASADENA, CALIFORNIA
The City of Pasadena (population 143,400) places Preservation and Urban Design in
the same division within the Planning Department. Pasadena uses the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) development review process that includes
consideration of effects of proposed projects on historically eligible properties. The City
publishes thorough handouts on its historic preservation program and review, including
a handout.on the thresholds for design review and demolition review within historic
districts. The City's website also has a high level of prominence and content of
preservation information available including links to green tips for historic homes.
Pasadena also published a report on recent past resources in 2007.
1. Development Review Process
Design and Historic Preservation review in Pasadena is applied for under one master
permit application. Work on both designated resources and resources eligible for
designation is reviewed. The Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) does most
preservation review for major projects; however, in the Central District a separate
Design Commission conducts the review. Both the Design Commission and the HPC
are trained in historic preservation. .
2. Delegated Decision-Making
Pasadena has two categories of Historic Preservation Review, one by the Historic
Preservation Commission and one at the staff level. The code specifies the division of
review between the HPC and staff based on the type of historic resource (designated or
Winter&Company Page 8
Peer Community Review October 9, 2009
eligible and potentially eligible properties) and the type of work proposed. This division
is also clearly explained in a Historic Preservation Review information packet.
3. Consideration of Unlisted Properties 50 Years Old
The City of Pasadena does not use age as a criterion for designation. As part of its
preservation incentives program Pasadena conditionally permits an office use in
buildings over 50 years old as a non-conforming use.
4. Demolition Review
Demolition applications for any primary structure may not be approved until a building
permit for a replacement building is obtained. The HPC or staff may grant exceptions to
this requirement if the structure is not designated or eligible as a historic resource or
contributor to a historic district.
5. Structures of Merit
Pasadena does not have a structure of merit or similar designation.
6. Surveys
Surveys include a preliminary determination of historic integrity for each property within
the survey boundaries. Survey information is made available online and searchable
through the California Historical Resources Inventory Database (CHRID). Design review
for a demolition or alteration follows the same procedures for both surveyed properties
and potentially significant properties that have not been surveyed.
7. Incentives
In addition to financial benefits available on the state and national levels, Pasadena
provides several incentives for designated and eligible historic properties. Financial
incentives include reduced permit fees and a fagade easement program. Technical
assistance is available both in the form of meetings with professionals and City
publications. The City also provides flexibility in zoning requirements for historic
properties to encourage adaptive reuse over demolition. These include parking
requirement waivers and other requirements that may create spatial requirements on a
site that a renovation is not able to comply with. Historic signs listed in the historic sign
inventory are also exempt from the sign regulations in the zoning code for height, area,
location, etc.
8. Sustainability
Pasadena's preservation program does not include policies for sustainability. The City
has a green building ordinance, though it is not tied directly to historic preservation.
9. Economic Development
Pasadena's goals for economic development include one brief reference to
preservation: "To further aid economic development, encourage the highest level of
urban design and architectural preservation consistent with reasonable use and
economic feasibility considerations."
Winter 8 Company Page 9
Peer Community Review October 9, 2009
10. Recent Past Resources
Pasadena has conducted several surveys of recent past resources. The City has also
published a booklet on local recent past resources. The City does not currently specify
the inclusion of recent past resources in its preservation policies; however, it is being
considered for future program updates.
V. SUMMARY OBSERVATIONS
1. Development Review Process
Many communities define multiple levels of review, based upon the level of significance
of a property. Most peer communities review projects based on the Secretary of the
Interior's Standards and local design guidelines. Guidelines can be for both individual
districts and/or for all historic properties.
2. Delegated Decision-Making
The majority of peer communities include provisions for staff level review and approval
of minor projects. Typically, there is a clearly defined method for determining which
projects qualify for this level of review.
3. Consideration of Unlisted Properties 50 Years Old
Many peer communities require preservation review of properties that are potentially
significant. Within these communities, potentially significant properties are identified
either by staff at the time of application, or based upon an established list of properties
identified through surveys. When used, age is typically considered by staff to help
identify potentially significant properties when an application is received.
4. Demolition Review
The majority of peer communities require some form of demolition delay and
preservation review for non-designated properties. These policies typically require the
delay in order to determine the significance of the property and, if significant, to review
alternatives to demolition.
S. Structures of Merit
A list of structures of merit is not typically used in most peer communities. When it is
used, the list is typically tied to survey lists for initial identification of potentially
significant properties.
6. Surveys
Many peer communities use surveys to identify a preliminary level of significance for a
property. Typically, this is later used to help identify non-designated properties that are
potentially significant and subject to preservation review.
7. Incentives
Most successful incentive programs in peer communities include exemptions for
development regulations that may create spatial requirements on a site that a
Winter& Company Page 10
Peer Community Review October 9, 2009
renovation is not able to comply with. Parking requirements are the most common
example of such an exemption.
8. Sustainability
Though currently only a few peer communities include sustainability in preservation
policies, all are discussing it and plan for its integration with future preservation program
updates.
9. Economic Development
Most peer communities recognize economic development as an important aspect of
preservation efforts and support. However, few communities have integrated it into their
preservation program.
10. Recent Past Resources
Currently only a few peer communities have integrated recent past resources into their
preservation programs; however, the majority of cities recognize this as an important
issue to be included in future system updates.
Winter& Company Page 11
ATTACHMENT 3
City of Fort Collins Historic Preservation Report
Implementation Recommendations
With Existing Resources We Can . . . 2010 = 2011 = 2012 = 2014 =
2011 2012 2013 2015
develop a preservation and sustainability
initiative
• hold informational workshops on how X X X X
preservation is sustainable
• create and publish informational handouts X X X X
include preservation policies in Plan Fort
Collins update
• include directives for survey and X
identification of resources
• preservation education and awareness X
• preservation incentives X
evaluate neighborhood character management
tools
• include historic preservation components in X
East Side- West Side design standards
develop new operating procedures
• provide more information to all property X X X X
owners in advance
• diagram the landmarks designation and X
design review processes .
• create easy to understand guidelines for
treatment of historic property types readily X X
available
• identify role of historic resources in city X X X X
plans and policies
• determine in advance which properties have X X X X
historic significance
update development review application form
• add questions related to building age X
update development review flow chart
• reference review of any officially listed
historic resource X
1
• lucidly explain what preservation staffs
involvement is in the development review X
flowchart
• add link to flow chart that illustrates what X
happens if a building is 50 years or older
publish a preservation review/designation flow
chart
• reconfigure links on DRG flow charts X
• add process that illustrates what happens if X
a building is 50 years or older
• describe how historic preservation process X
will operate and what criteria will be used
designate a Section 106 review coordinator
• document and review city' s undertakings in X X X X
regard to Section 106
• train designated Review Coordinator in X
Section 106 compliance procedures
• write procedures for Section 106 compliance X X X X
responsibilities
establish an annual preservation review report X
form
develop predictive model for property owners
• craft user-friendly "self-test" that could be X
available over the internet
• provide information on the web that will help
people develop their own preliminary X
estimate of the potential significance of a
property
• create a checklist that includes the criteria
that are typically used in determining X
significance , with explanations that facilitate
use by lay people
develop compliance -tracking form for
preservation projects
• develop a form , with designated sign -off X X X X
points , and attach to the building permit
• provide enforcement staff with clear
documentation of approved items to be used X
in conjunction with site inspections
expand incentives program
• offer flexibility in permitted uses , parking
requirements , building setbacks and other X X X X
code-related regulations
2
establish training program for planning staff
• orientation to the preservation system and X X X X
the principles involved
establish training program for the LPC
• include the city' s preservation policies and
review system as well as best practices in X X X X
preservation planning .
publish all preservation information on city X X
website
With Additional Resources We 2010 = 2011 - 2012 = 2014 -
Can . . . 2011 2012 2013 2015
develop a preservation and sustainability
initiative
• provide technical support for energy retrofits X
• establish policy that recognizes the role of
conserving existing buildings ( historic X
preservation ) as sustainable
• establish an assistance program for property
owners to accomplish historic preservation X
appropriate energy-saving retrofits
• establish a process for determining repair
and replacement strategies for windows , X
materials and roofing that take sustainability
into consideration
include preservation policies in Plan Fort
Collins update
• create regulations for preservation and X X X X
landmark designation
update sub-area plans to include preservation
• include preservation concerns when X X X X
developing all sub-area plans
• preservation staff should be involved in X X X X
development of sub-area and specific plans
• revisit all sub-area plans and add more X
discussion about historic preservation
evaluate tools for recent past resources X X
evaluate neighborhood character management
tools
• address additions , mass and scale to X X
existing buildings
3
adopt a tiered rating system X X
update existing ordinances
• Land Use Code : add language defining the
criteria for treatment of historic properties in
general , such that they will apply to all X X
potential property types , including single
family
• Land Use Code : add language to 3 . 4 . 7 ( E )
that references Municipal Code 14 -72 to X X
clarify applicable procedures for demolition
review
• Municipal Code : add language that more
clearly defines criteria for eligibility , and that X X
acknowledges different levels of
significance .
• Municipal Code : clarify the definition of
" integrity , " including the discussion of the X X
different " aspects " of integrity as used by the
Secretary of the Interior
• Municipal Code : Update the designation X X
procedures for districts
• Municipal Code : add language that limits
those who may initiate designation of a
historic district or landmark to : City Council , X X
LPC , Director of CDNS , the property owner,
properties in the district , Municipal Code :
organizations that are preservation oriented
• Municipal Code : clarify the preliminary level
of information that is needed to indicate that X X
a potential district exists and that further
consideration is merited
• Municipal Code : include language that
neighborhood meeting will be a part of the X X
district designation process
• Building Codes : include special sections for
existing buildings and historic structures .
This includes both Residential Building X X
Code 2003 and Commercial and Multi -family
Building Code 2006
designate a Section 106 review coordinator
• hire consultant services for more X X
complicated projects
4
expand staff' s ability to approve minor
applications
• create clear guidelines and standards in
order to expand staff' s ability to approve X X
minor applications
• Implement a survey system that supports
administrative review in order to expand X X
staff' s ability to approve minor applications
I historic and cultural resource surveys
I • conduct additional surveys and make readily X X X X
available on the internet
• implement an ongoing survey system to X X X X
address the "fifty year" question
• publish existing surveys on the city' s web X X
site and link them to GIS data systems
• include lists and maps of all currently listed
properties and all properties over 50 years X X
old
• refine the historic property survey instrument
with the objective of recording information X X
that will be useful in an on -going property
management mode
• update survey system with " key features" X X
develop additional context statements
• historic overviews (context statements )
describe the relationship of built resources
to the social and cultural history of the
community , identifies the typical property X X
types that are likely to be involved , and
suggests areas where these resources are
most likely to occur
adopt preservation design guidelines
• create clearly written , well -illustrated design X X
guidelines
• outline options for design that will help users
understand the range of flexibility that may X X
be available for treatment of certain
properties
• address new , emerging issues such as
energy conservation and " recent past" X X
resources
5
• address how development review occurs on
properties abutting historic districts ( not X X
clear in LUC )
• provide information about alterations for X X
historic buildings in guidelines
adopt design guidelines for edges of districts X X
update Old Town design guidelines
• include more detail , clarify areas of
flexibility , as well as define appropriate and X X
inappropriate design actions
publish all preservation information on city
website
• publish design guidelines X X
• publish case studies illustrating successful
" solutions" regarding historic preservation X X
issues
• publish educational materials such as
brochures on historic preservation in Fort X X
Collins
• publish surveys of individual properties X X
• publish historic contexts maps X X
expand incentives program
• offer a rebate on the local sales tax of
construction materials that are purchased X X
for an approved preservation project
• offer small design assistance grants to
property owners to help them plan an X X
appropriate design
• waive or reduce local permit fees X X
6
City of Fort Collins
Preservation System Improvement
Strategy
April 13 , 2010
1950s 1982 1983 1984
General Direction Sought
1 . Does Council have any questions or
concerns about the information and
recommendations for the process or the
policy modifications presented in the Historic
Preservation Program Assessment?
2 . Is Council comfortable with the
" implementation phasing table " timeline
given current resources ?
F�`orTytf
2
Agenda
Project Background Project Objectives
Project Scope
Preservation &
Development Review
Project Approach Recommendations
1982 2009
31 Winter & Company
Project Background
Established preservation program
Well-known success stories
Recent questions about the process
Opportunity to op ' ize the program
1982 009
4 1 Winter & Company
Evidenceof
ron ColeM. Ceie,eye . rrr.r.r re..eDe..�.
. rm cwr..c
r e
Flo wift ftu a adkinopqps
N
FoA Collins, Cobrado
do
aw+a�. nn� pww �ar.ansY,wa��
w1: IIT.I)IA renwrY . w�.rrw u.�sr, ruremwc.c. r.rea. wY. wo w ._. civet ftmF r
rw/...r.ur'/.'A• Pn T14VD,. "aft W ees eM MD4.eee dr(/L CY C au Wdo:
7yrry� Sa 4 ra C/Ir.YbtY1 Ornrw n)bN.anOwf eatdrrCW b[►w� NT Cat _
. Dw4 bleeftowt rL dly.5(e eew :T rvOY }Ae+' /r 'rYDCGVtlI' iM fete
. fp,/� Ylltl¢DaYe.b.. M1a�YbC Y+ Jl.urw.ry rYY rr�l Wy,m�p/.�YY btl
. rYU.e faY1 Y\'IDLM MMM eIC Al� �
. Cuw,ww
. 11N.• Yu bnYrYrM1�
ree1P rMWr
t GecvW rry O.��.
Mulpw W.
. y lVeamy L \ be
fstlwr wr )}Eewm+
. aaiai by., eEmDnY
. rtl,rprnDM. e . bev..berwwewYwatl .n.+r
. os.bbrrwr etw�..w� ewe.tlb.w
. wY e) . w..eemr.aw.r vL
® erraurv..ow�Y !l
. reYetiw ee wD•r.e Nwr • ,
. iweratlp� rnnrr.rYem - • V y"
LMti ca.es.ermr.a.+
4ereP e eNnreY 9pe.h lwY rrtlMonrrF�tls�
. nnePrwP GieY�e �.TC71'N �aYe'ei Wr
• ��ti 101efIr
• Lwwe4 tip w.w .r.enw,r � =Yates
ti Bw
R7b I]RMY.rur CetlA' IMMCPIV yi
• �^ 14 e11we NrWti 1eM
. Nee .•er.ee•�e reutlr it inam
Project • •
ProcessPart 1 : • •
MunicipalPart II : • Land Use Code Review
6 Winter & Company
3
Approach — Balancing Interests
Preservation of the . Political Inte
community's . Econom "c
heritage Develop
Maintaining a sense . Ease of
of community Administration
identity Community
Sustainability Development
71 Winter & Company
Project Objectives
Procedural
improvements
• Better integrate into
community planning jUw--
v ,
Anticipate new 1982
trends in
preservation
2009
81 Winter & Company
What does " Preservation " mean ?
Using historic properties
Accommodating change pp •;
that is appropriate 1
s
Maintaining key character-
defining features — `
Question:
How well is this concept
n r.
conveyed to the public ? -
91 Winter & Company
Preservation in the 21 st Century
Integrated into A Strategy for
Planning & Livability
Development An Economic
A Key Element in Development Tool
Sustainability Solution -oriented
Question:
How well is the Fort Collins program
positioned to address these concepts ?
10 Winter & Company
JLAn Effective Program Is :
mm 7Green
eusing buildings saves embodied energy
Retrofitting performance
Sustainability policies recognize • resources
ObjectiveClean
• review process
Predictable
Lean
Efficient use of • resources
Solution-oriented
11 Winter & Company
Development • •
_ l , Development
W"ur r« wr uw ww n..w.r. u•.•n•r — • Review
cwwr• �� �.r. (ae M �M
_ �__ -� = - — �•�rC, Flowchart
;,731t
ation Path A Preservation Path B
6
Issue :
How to be flexible and et consistent?
Staff needs to be objective
Flexibility is best established in the
planning structure :
Different levels of significance
Options shown in guidelines
Other considerations " balanced " at
the P&Z or City Council level
Established at time of designation
Signaled in sub-area plans
131 Winter & Company
Issue : 3 "Tracks" for Historic Resources
, . Formal LPC Process
Officially designated landmarks
2. LUC Development Review
Projects subject to LUC review , with
older structures
3. Building Permit Application
Projects with properties 50 years old
Section 14-72 Municipal Code
14 1 Winter & Company
Issue : Lack of Clear Design Guidance
• How can I get ideas in
advance? -
• What criteria will staff
and the Commission
use? �
What are the types of
guidance needed ?
151 Winter & Company
Issue : "Are we doing enough in the preservation
ro ram ?"
• Focus on "Victorian " =' ' ,3w
commercial buildings
Neighborhoods are �`
changing _
• Few recent
designations as
landmarks
• Potential resources
being lost w . sue
161 Winter & Company
Issue :
The LUC Interface Is Not Clear to All
No "advance notice"
When do I discover that my
property may have significance?
How is significance determined?
Can an owner "predict"
significance?
When may I contact
Preservation Staff?
What if I disagree ?
171 Winter & Company
Issue : Limited Web Presen ation
Information
Missing :
GIS Information
Property Survey Data
Preservation Case 1982
Studies
Design Guidelines
Technical Resources
2008
181 Winter & Company
Issue :
Changing Values about Significance
Evolving awareness
about what is ' -
historically significant M'
Reuse of old ' .
commercial corridors
191 Winter & Company
Issue : Incorporating Historic Resources in
Developing Corridors
■ Structure meets 50
year threshold
■ Has a moderate
level of significance
■ "Conservation "
approach «
■ Flexible
considerations ;L
San Jose, CA: Originally a small
retail building, centered on the site.
201 Winter & Company
1
Issue : Examples of Reusing Historic Resources
in Developing Corridors
Original building New building Relocated building
IV
+.f0 +• i ,
fit ( r L
Before After
San Jose , CA: A ' nt Past" Building in a
Redevelopment Project.
211 Winter & Company
Issue : Incorporating Historic Resources in
Developing Corridors
Adaptive Reuse :
New building Relocated building
f � . .
1
.J
San Jose , CA: A " Recent Past" Building in a
Redevelopment Project.
22 1 Winter & Company
Historic Preservation Recommendations
, . Policy Directives 7. Incentives &
2. Ordinances Benefits
3. Operating 8. Public Education &
Procedures Outreach
4. Historic Resource 9. Activity Reporting
Surveys , o. Designation
5. Design Guidelines Categories
6. Compliance
Process
231 Winter & Company
1 . Policy Directives
Objectives : Key Actions
Provide clearer , . Include preservation in
policies for historic sustainability initiatives
resources 2. Include preservation in
Provide more City Plan update
information about 3. Update sub-area plans
levels of significance to include preservation
4. Adopt a tiered rating
system
24 1 Winter & Company
2 . Ordinances
Objectivesm Key Actions .
Improve consistency Update code elements
Enhance user- Charts and graphics
friendliness - - definitions
CompanyAddress new trends Address new issues
Trpc of Action Permit lice aired:' Pcrmiticd Ifr :
No (1) 1'es (2) 1 PC Director
Demolition - Complete
Potential Individual Landmark X X
Potential Contributor X X
Potential Non-contributor X X
Demolition - Partial
Remove Non-contributing X X
Other Partial Ikmo X X
Addition
Rear X X
Roof X X
Side X X
Front X X
Alteration - Minor
Replace window in kind X
Rc lace siding in kind X
All other minor alterations X X
Alteration - Major
Wall surtace X X
Roof X X
Porch
13
3 . Operating Procedures
Objectives : Key Actions :
Clarify process 1 . Update revie
Improve predictability application
Provide flexibility 2. Update develop It
review chart
3. Publish preservation
flow chart
4. Designate 106
coordinator
271 Winter & Company
4 . Historic Resource Surveys
Objectives : Key Actions :
Provide more 1 . Adopt tiered survey
advance information 2. Expand surveyed
Provide information areas
owners can use 3. Post information on
Improve access to the web
information 4. Provide owner "self-
test" for significance
281 Winter & Company
5 . Design Guidelines
Objectives : Key Actions :
Improve predictability , . Develop guidelines
Clarify range of for preservation
flexibility . Update guidelines for
Help owners make Old Town
informed decisions 3. Include recent past
properties
29 � Winter & Company
New Guidelines :
Add dia rams and charts
Steps for Planning a Preservation Project:
Historic Building
1
ridifign
15
Determine
Treatment Strategy
30 � Winter & Company
Guidelines :New
Include " Decision HeIRers "
ALTERED BUILDING, RECOVERABLE COMMERCIAL STOREFRONT:
I have an altered historic commercial building front, but it is recoverable. what
can Ido?
[ .nenp Condition
Option I Orion }isimisiss.)
Opoon
when Would I me this whop should I me this when should I ides this
arppoaohi oppreep spproachi
• The Eurday a hphly spiI • The buddy a a oonvl ar to • Tnee is r:A.Iys-ie..i del�m�a
far11 • eMbIC pippin TJlny 00,an I- discus
• TharNapaisil- to Thop Is bee Mlor¢al n- • Ihers s ess hnln¢ mlornw
W $10011111 ft pulpn III mm prpla0b ahpl tlr hors ai M Vm drain dasq
•ThensededllpYwlepereep 11 • prl111 dY4p • The roMaN Ns mare inip
•Th ara Na bole •TM"Wk lMrmeWnsed
•The w dhoo Poop
•llr vaarlp aldhenlpassd
• The UOIpIOT Ip� Ilp�tl YIYUI
nlalwpc hp�pllpp
DesignNew
•
Help owners plan their project
SouA Pc�is oh HISTORe Buaon+cs:
I Nve a Mlanc rOLdMhsl dnNing !nd I
Example mould cede Io add some solar parcels. Mat
shwle IOOT
demonstrating choicesa..s•a c..rs..
for • panels
.:d• �� V
321
plsAprpal�
a.re
once.p:ll�..a
Winter & Company
16
7 . Incentives & Benefits
Objectives : Key Actions :
Strengthen , . Expand incentives
advantages of package
preserving buildings Sales tax rebate?
for owners Land use flexibility?
. Technical
assistance?
Other?
331 Winter & Company
8 . Public Education & Outreach
Objectives : Key Actions .
. Help property owners , . Provide technical
preserve their how-to workshops
properties z. Sponsor rehab tech
training programs
34 1 Winter & Company
1 Designation Cat
Significantm NotSignificant :
Priority0 Type 1 : Highest Type IV: Restorable
• • • •
11111 • - II : High Priority • - No
IN • - Moderate
CompanyPriority Expected
Potential Tiered System
Property Rating Treatment Objectives Notes
Type 1
Highest level of significance. Require preservation to High priority for
individually eligible for National maximum extent assistance and
Register listing. feasible' . incentives. Landmark
proceedings may be
contemplated if
necessary.
Type 2
High level of significance. Require preservation to High priority for
eligible as a contributor for maximum extent assistance and
National Register listing. feasible' . incentives. Landmark
proceedings may be
contemplated if
necessary.
Type 3
Moderate level of significance . Encourage preservation Provide incentives. but
when feasible. may consider mitigation
alternatives when other
compelling city
objectives exist.
18
Implementation Phasing
City of Fort Collins Preservation System Enhancements
Recommended Implementation Phasing
Year 1 -2 Year 2-3 Year 3-4 Year 4-5
Polmw Defforal
Develop a preservation and sustannadhly ,nmlauve On gong On-gong On-going On
Include preservation in City Plan update Drah Adopt
Update sub-area plans to include preservation Renew Amend
Evaluate tools for recant past resources Strategy Adopt
Evaluate neighborhood character management toots Strategy Implement
to a hared ratio S iem Draft Adopt
Or
Update existing Adopt
Developnew $l of Adopt
Update development review appbcatwn form Arnand
Update development review flow Chan Amend
Publish a Preservation review/designation flow Chart Publish
Designate 106 review Coordinator _ Adopt
Establish an annual preservation review report form _ Adopt On join On-going On
Expand staffs ability to a rove manor applications Adopt
BLN%WA Milli
Publicize all surveys on the city s webvle Ntir20 Pubdsh
Conduct additional surveys Surl Survey C pull "-D
Update survey system wart key features Update
Develop additional caHext statements lbtkA _ Topic B Topic C _ le D
Develop predictive model for property owners Draft Implement
Adopt cdy-wide, preservation design guidelines Fund,rig Draft Ad0�M_
Adopt city wide design guidelines for edges of dlstncts Funning Draft Ad0a1
Jpctale Old Town design guidelines Funding Drill Adopt
ROC!!6
Develop compliance tackin form for rrieservalion ro n.ts AoWt On- nin On On- om
1
IMDlI I
Criterian Priority
. • Actions .
AmendEase of Tiered Rating
Implementation System
Essential for 2. Ongoing Surveys
Success 3. Design Guidelines
5.
Ordinance
iWinter & Company
19
Conclusion
For Enhanced
Effectiveness : %
The program requires a I I d
clear and balanced I ,
vision 982
Strategic and efficient
use of resources et
1 1
2009
391 Winter & Company
General Direction Sought
1 . Does Council have any questions or concerns
about the information and recommendations for the
process or the policy modifications presented in the
Historic Preservation Program Assessment?
2 . Is Council comfortable with the " implementation
phasing table" timeline given current resources?
F�tJ 11
40
1